Many countries have now assessed their vulnerability and overall risk of being the target of a cyber attack. Inside sources have leaked information to the media stating the heightened state of concern they now have after being briefed on the results of the vulnerability and risk assessments. These results have put pressure on the military and intelligence leaders to address the growing threat. Military and intelligence leaders around the world are struggling with the new reality of cyber warfare. While there are a few hot spots where conventional conflict might erupt, there is growing concern among this group about the new reality of cyber war.
One foreign Intelligence analyst told me that “we face only a remote chance of major conventional military threat involving his country through 2025.” She went on to say “Asymmetric capabilities like cyber warfare might threaten the security we have gained over the past two decades.”
The cyber intelligence challenge for Intel agencies manifests themselves in the fundamental characteristics of cyber weapons. A cruise missile costs between $1 and $2 million and requires a large manufacturing facility and a substantial amount of infrastructure. A cyber weapon on the other hand costs between a few hundred dollars up to $50,000 and next to no infrastructure. The only infrastructure is a computer and an Internet connection. A cyber weapons manufacturing facility can be located in a single family home.
The challenge for the intelligence community is significant. Perhaps even the greatest challenge in history. While cyber intelligence is rather new, there is some information sources in this area that are actively being used to collect information about attacks that have or are taking place as well as those that are planned. Intel agencies often times are unable to share information they have about planned or current cyber attacks against companies. This is primarily due to the very real possibility that the disclosure would or could jeopardize the source of the intelligence. Many argue what good is the intelligence if we do not use it. This is a very sticky situation that must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Cyber weapons proliferation requires all countries to rethink intelligence collection from the ground up. New sources of intelligence and data are required along with augmentation of our human intelligence sources if we are to reduce the risk of cyber attacks as well as a cyber war.
Mac!Why are you into magic first and foremost…
Magic is all lies and murder!!!Anyone can be used
by some magic power to over throw a countries computers…Therefore stay away from crystal balls!
Asymmetrical warfare is key here!An unbalance is
all sides personally and forced by the enemy!Look
at our present crisis of economy is an inside job.
Mainly Defense spending…A very bad asymmetrical
unbalance between Gov/people…The Law is asymmetrical also!
Scary, very scary since no “emissions”.
How to find Code source to find Physical source.
Very 1984.
Scary, very scary since no “emissions”.
How to find Code source to find Physical source.
Very 1984.
Sounds shrill. There is lots of hype but no meet. Really, what the hell is a “cyber weapons manufacturing facility.” Using the language of war, as opposed to IT security, is singularly unhelpful.
One disaggregate internet security risks to give any meaning to this blather. Are we talking about spam? Denial of service? Spying? Destructive viruses? Remote control of friendly computer operations? Disinformation campaigns? Communication of terrorist or espionage activities?
Different threats entail different regimes of defense, and different risks. Frequently, the ability to go “offline” can be a very functional plan B.
Almost all conceivable cyber threats are dual purpose — used as much by commercially interested parties and plain old criminals as sovereign or paramilitary adversaries.
Without details it is very hard to take the cyber war community seriously.
Also, the cyber attack link in the article appears to be a bad link. Guided artillery has no obvious connection to cyber warfare.
All of this just sounds soooooooo scary,thank God for the Army Sea Smurf(CCMF) unit domestically deployed to protect us from those terrorist bogeymen that we can’t see & who look just like.……US!!!!!!! La,La.…..La,La,La,La.
The biggest advantage compared to conventional warfare is the ease of deployment and the anonymity.
For example, it may be a lot easier to take down a government with hacking than sending in strike fighters. As Kevin stated, Cyberwar can be done on the cheap, where a physical invasion could cost millions or more. Just like IED’s, Cyber attacks are inexpensive and very disruptive.
And because of the ability to mask the origin of attack by bouncing through other countries, decifering the source group or groups can be very difficult. Especially if the countries involved are not friendly to the US. I am sure for example, Iran would bend over backwards to help the US track down a hacker who used Iranian machines as a proxy. Yeah right…
The other twist is the attack could be originated by a foreign government or it could just be a bunch of 16 year old kids trying to gain prestige in the hacking world.
It is imperative that the allied nations come together and decide how to deal with this hi-tech threat, and they are, Nato creates cyber defense center.
oops, the link didn’t work for “Nato creates cyber defense center“
it should have pointed to:
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/05/14/europe/EU-GEN-NATO-Cyber-Defenses.php
CNN news had an article today named “Homeland Security seeks cyber counterattack system“
Very interesting, the current version “Einstein 2.0″ looks like it is only an IDS on steroids, but the next version, 3.0, may have the ability to fight back. Kind of like the modern shot detection systems that can pinpoint where a round comes from and return fire.
The current Einstein 2.0 uses signature based detection. It sounds like it may have the same problem as virus scanner programs. Those who write viruses know that the detectors are looking for a specific file name or data pattern, so they change it. The virus scanners then need to be updated to include the new patterns. This becomes an endless game.
But I think the next version will be more active in discerning actual attack patterns and not just specific signatures.
More info on Einstein 2 is at:
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_pia_einstein2.pdf
Why are you using the word “conventional”,with cyber warfare? It really isn’t conventional…
Conventional isn’t really a way anymore!
That’s OK!But take a closer look following link,It’s great to DVD and PSP
converter for mac!
http://www.macdvdripper.org
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-ripper-suite.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-converter-suite.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-copy.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-creator.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-to-ipod-converter.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-to-iphone-converter.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-to-mp4-converter.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-to-apple-tv-converter.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-to-psp-converter.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-to-blackberry-converter.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/mac-dvd-audio-ripper.html
http://www.macdvdripper.org/how-to-edit-dvd-trim-video-crop-take-effects.html
http://www.vobconvertermac.com/,
http://www.vobconvertermac.com/vob-to-ipod-converter-for-mac.html
http://www.vobconvertermac.com/vob-to-apple-tv-converter-for-mac.html
http://www.vobconvertermac.com/vob-to-psp-converter-for-mac.html
http://www.vobconvertermac.com/vob-to-mpeg4-converter-for-mac.html
http://www.vobconvertermac.com/vob-to-m4v-converter-for-mac.html
http://www.vobconvertermac.com/vob-to-3gp-converter-for-mac.html
http://www.vobconvertermac.com/vob-to-mpg-converter-for-mac.html
http://www.vobconvertermac.com/vob-to-avi-converter-for-mac.html