Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Trump, Seeking To Relax Rules on US Cyberattacks, Reverses Obama Directive (wsj.com)

Posted by msmash on from the for-the-record dept.

President Trump has reversed an Obama-era memorandum dictating how and when the U.S. government can deploy cyberweapons against its adversaries, in an effort to loosen restrictions on such operations [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled; alternative source], WSJ reports. From the report: Mr. Trump signed an order on Wednesday reversing the classified rules, known as Presidential Policy Directive 20, that had mapped out an elaborate interagency process that must be followed before U.S. use of cyberattacks, particularly those geared at foreign adversaries. The change was described as an "offensive step forward" by an administration official briefed on the decision, one intended to help support military operations, deter foreign election influence and thwart intellectual property theft by meeting such threats with more forceful responses. The Trump administration has faced pressure to show that it is taking seriously national-security cyberthreats -- particularly those that intelligence officials say are posed by Moscow.

13 of 153 comments (clear)

  1. Oh, here we go ... by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh, here we go ... Obama is apparently like an ancient Persian king; one cannot not simply reverse his dictates!

    1. Re:Oh, here we go ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, here we go ... Obama is apparently like an ancient Persian king; one cannot not simply reverse his dictates!

      The problem isn't so much that Trump is reversing a policy of Obama.

      The problem is that Trump makes policy by shooting from the hip, with no consideration for the ramifications of it. Nobody does any analysis or planning, just suddenly there is a bad policy dumped one everyone.

      Now while saying there was no foreign interference, Trump is protecting us from foreign interference. Which is it? It never happened and we don't need to be protected? Or it did and Trump is still lying about it?

      The problem is other countries might decide this is an Unfriendly Act (which is diplomat speak for 'we don't like what you're doing and we're monitoring it'), and if escalates to a Hostile Act (which is diplomat speak for 'now we're really pissed off and things are going to get messy').

      Trump is essentially authorising hostile actions against foreign entities without oversight and planning.

      Shit like that can get dangerous in terms of relations between countries.

      The problems happen when Trump makes policy without consulting with the people who know what they're talking about (you know, 'elites') and instead relies on his own feels and stupidity.

    2. Re: Oh, here we go ... by omnichad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What will make lots of people like me?

      Sex or cloning.

    3. Re:Oh, here we go ... by omnichad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trump is essentially authorising hostile actions against foreign entities without oversight and planning.

      More like Trump is explicitly telling other countries that it's OK to try and hack us. Because it goes both ways. It's like Net Neutrality. Before it existed, there might have been some general intellectual agreement about what was OK and what was not OK. After it was repealed, that's an explicit statement that doing the formerly banned things is explicitly OK. It doesn't revert back to undefined or there would be no motive to repeal.

    4. Re:Oh, here we go ... by GregMmm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'll preface this comment by I'm not a huge President Trump supporter. But people need to know how to look at things objectively, outside their views.

      People are tired of the same rhetoric which is doing nothing. Yes this change can be dangerous, and yes it can be "messy". What was happening before is also dangerous and messy. Do nothing, and allow the bullies to have their way. Then we will say stop and the bullies laugh all the more.

      Why do you think President Trump was voted into office? It wasn't the Russians. Heavens knows we influence foreign governments much more. People are tired of the status quo. So change came in someone outside the political system.

      By the way, I like your vast assumptions in your comment. I suppose you know for a fact how "Trump shoots from the hip" Talked to him lately? You know the man? Also how you took President Trumps action from changing a policy (which is his job) to saying he's "essentially authorizing hostile actions without oversight or planning" Yup, he just changed a policy and now he's going rogue. Sounds like the same policy and political BS we hear everyday.

    5. Re:Oh, here we go ... by snapsnap · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Like DACA that was an Obama EO? A judge recently ruled Trump couldn't undo part of it with his own EO. What a ridiculous double-standard.

    6. Re:Oh, here we go ... by snapsnap · · Score: 4, Funny

      > he just changed a policy and now he's going rogue

      This is /. so we need a car analogy. So, by refusing to buy a new car, I'm obviously against the entire car industry.

    7. Re:Oh, here we go ... by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's hilarious. The scale of electronic collection operations increased dramatically under Obama. Or do you think the Utah Data Center was built for shits and giggles?

      But regardless, this is not/should not be a partisan issue, and one of the most compelling reasons to limit offensive operations and strengthen vulnerability disclosure rules is that we all use the same shit. If the NSA or other TLA is actively exploiting vulnerabilities in common platforms such as OSes, routers, or cellular infrastructure, then they are, by definition, leaving America's identical technology vulnerable to the exact same attacks by our adversaries. By leaving ourselves vulnerable, we are trading access to our own secrets -- from classified government information, to corporate trade secrets, to political party internals -- for access to information that we should reasonably be able to collect through other means. It's shooting ourselves in the foot and hoping the ricochet hits our enemies.

      --
      https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
    8. Re:Oh, here we go ... by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 3

      By the way, I like your vast assumptions in your comment. I suppose you know for a fact how "Trump shoots from the hip" Talked to him lately? You know the man? Also how you took President Trumps action from changing a policy (which is his job) to saying he's "essentially authorizing hostile actions without oversight or planning" Yup, he just changed a policy and now he's going rogue. Sounds like the same policy and political BS we hear everyday.

      We have a president who very literally seems confused by what policies his own administration is following. That is not an exaggeration.

      Whether he goes "rogue" or not, a president who implements a great policy badly is probably going to be worse for the nation than a president to implements a mediocre policy reasonably well.

      The main effect of this Obama policy is to force the various departments to talk to each other before a significant change of policy that involves what is likely to be interpreted as a hostile action. I do not see why any competent president would find that a big burden. Of course, a completely incompetent president might find having to explain his own policy to people who are following trying to follow his directions a big burden -- that is clear.

  2. Hack the planet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Donald 1337 Trumpxorz

  3. Re:So Trump is actually DOING SOMETHING about Russ by Comboman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If Obama had done something to stop Russian election meddling, Trump and his supporters would have flipped out and claimed he was fixing the election for Hillary. They already Obama was "spying" on them because he was investigating the Russian meddling.

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
  4. Trump says he can recognize Crimea as Russian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And the GOP House? Can Trump simply ignore *those* dictates? Because the McCain Defense Authorization Bill, requires he cannot accept Russian soverignty of Crimea, and the first thing he did was annul that clause with a signing statement.

    "President Donald Trump said in a statement he reserves the right to ignore the defense authorization law’s ban on U.S. recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, among 50 other provisions he says tread on his authority as president.,....Trump objected to four of eight provisions focused on Russia. For example, the law would limit the use of federal funds to recognize Russian control over Crimea, "

    https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2018/08/14/trump-signals-he-may-ignore-russia-provisions-in-defense-bill-he-just-signed/

    To be clear, this is a Republican House asserting the USA's position on Russia, that's he's reversing. It's not partisan, it's Trump vs American interests.

    Can I remind you that Wagner, the Russian contractor that attacked the US position Al Tabiyeh, in Syria had Kremlin authorization, according to intercepted communications. So we're not just as some sort of vague fluffy cyber war with Russia, they are actively attacking military positions too.

    Meanwhile a few traitors from the GOP, who thankfully do not represent the majority, visit Putin seeking help in the upcoming elections. Two visit so far, with GOP people promising *not* to vote for further sanctions, no matter how bad Russia is. I'm sure US troops don't feel stabbed in the back by that as Russia troops fire missiles at them.

    Yeh we get it, it's election time and they'll do anything to get power, even side with US enemies. Traitors.

  5. Meaningless by Archtech · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In the first place, all such self-denying laws and regulations are honoured in the breech. They look good to the peasants and the outside world, but the executive agencies simply ignore them when they are inconvenient. For many years there was a presidential policy against assassinating foreign leaders! During which period countless such plots were hatched and carried out - with occasional success.

    In the second place, there is only one real deterrent to using any weapon against foreign powers - retaliation. The USA has by far the biggest and most fragile house of cards when it comes to IT infrastructure. Americans are living in the largest, most elaborate glasshouse ever constructed, so it wouldn't be smart for them to start throwing rocks at people who live in mud huts or concrete blockhouses. (And who have plenty of nice big rocks to throw back).

    --
    I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.