DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Cyber-warfare » Foreign Policy for Cyber Space

Foreign Policy for Cyber Space

hillary-clinton.jpg

At last count the Internet con­nects to over 170 coun­ties and 1.7 bil­lion users world­wide. The breadth and depth of the Internet demands diplo­matic atten­tion and coor­di­na­tion, par­tic­u­larly in the areas of cyber crime, cyber espi­onage, cyber ter­ror­ism and cyber war­fare. The eco­nomic impli­ca­tions of these threats were clearly artic­u­lated by econ­o­mists at the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland. This is not the first time experts have raised this issue on the world stage.

The numer­ous warn­ing of the mag­ni­tude of the threat of cyber aggres­sion must be heeded. In February of this year in my pre­sen­ta­tion at the United Nations, I took the oppor­tu­nity to call upon the United Nations to take a much more prag­matic and promi­nent role in pro­tect­ing against the immi­nent threat of cyber attacks, cyber ter­ror­ism and cyber war­fare. Without imme­di­ate action it is just a mat­ter of time before the world expe­ri­ences a sub­stan­tive event — the threat of a mas­sive cyber attack or war.

Acts of cyber aggres­sion rep­re­sent the top transna­tional threat of the 21st Century. To that end, pres­i­dent Obama has spo­ken of new ini­tia­tives designed to strengthen the nation’s dig­i­tal defenses against cyber attacks. That being said, where are the efforts to bol­ster inter­na­tional coop­er­a­tion to bring those behind these acts to justice?

Cyber secu­rity must be esca­lated to a top pri­or­ity of the Obama admin­is­tra­tion. This must include bidi­rec­tional for­eign poli­cies needed to sup­port cyber attack inves­ti­ga­tions. The respon­si­bil­ity for this would fall under the office of the Secretary of State. Sec. Clinton must take a lead­er­ship posi­tion in these efforts and accel­er­ate an inter­na­tional dia­log that leads to coop­er­a­tive agreements.

FACT: There are cur­rently over 170 coun­tries directly con­nected to the Internet back­bone.
FACT: There were over 60 tril­lion emails sent in 2008, about 70 per­cent of those spam.
FACT: There are approx­i­mately 140 mil­lion blogs on the Internet.
FACT: There are approx­i­mately 190 mil­lion web sites.

Now is the time to address the global coop­er­a­tion needed to defend against, inves­ti­gate and bring to jus­tice those who com­mit acts of cyber aggres­sions not amid the throws of an inter­na­tional crisis.

– Kevin Coleman

Share |

September 1st, 2009 | Cyber-warfare | 470932 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2009/09/01/foreign-policy-for-cyber-space/Foreign+Policy+for+Cyber+Space2009-09-01+11%3A54%3A35jnoonan You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « US Army Defining Modernization Plan | Spinning Out with the E-​​IBCT » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. gsak says:
    September 1, 2009 at 9:46 am

    1– Keep the free­dom to pos­sess secu­rity tools with­out cer­ti­fi­ca­tion or license.
    2– Don’t rely on the gov­ern­ment for pro­fes­sional cer­ti­fi­ca­tion stan­dards.
    If I were inter­view­ing some­one, I would per­son­ally com­pletely dis­re­gard A+, Network+, Security+, CCNA, MSDE. Anything. They basi­cally mean noth­ing in the real world of work ethic, being a team mem­ber, or even being good. I know how hard it can be to cram for an exam, but the sad, sad real­ity is cer­ti­fi­ca­tions are an illusion.

    Reply
  2. SpyGuy says:
    September 1, 2009 at 3:44 pm

    This envi­ron­ment is chang­ing too quickly to just reply on cer­ti­fi­ca­tion. You can fall out of date in a sin­gle day. Cyber Intelligence infor­ma­tion dis­tri­b­u­tion is crit­i­cal with all coun­tries contributing!

    Reply
  3. Mang says:
    September 1, 2009 at 5:44 pm

    Why’s Clinton’s face head­ing this arti­cle? Don’t bait ass­holes for snarky com­ments, the world is unpleas­ant enough as it is…
    Totally agreed on the neces­sity for increased cyber defense. Don’t expect a sub­stan­tive cyber defense pol­icy to have a large pub­lic pro­file or for some­one like Clinton to cham­pion it — why should she? Our pro­gram would be run by the Pentagon, so expect a Pentagon staffer to be the front­per­son, or some ex-​​university pro­fes­sor.
    Also… The econ­omy is shred­ded, we’re still more or less fight­ing two wars, and much of the left­over efforts of the admin­is­tra­tion are focused on the health­care issue. And con­ser­v­a­tives seem to be mostly scream­ing about death pan­els these days, so expect even less inter­est from them on this. But I would love to be proved wrong!

    Reply
  4. Mang says:
    September 1, 2009 at 5:47 pm

    Someone who knows more than me please expound — what are the like­li­hoods and holdups for the State Department tak­ing up this issue? In what capac­ity are they deal­ing with cyberde­fense now, if any?

    Reply
  5. Kevin says:
    September 1, 2009 at 6:55 pm

    Mang
    Most cyber attacks are routed through inter­me­di­ary coun­tries. The state depart­ment needs to nego­ti­ate coop­er­a­tion agree­ments to assist inves­ti­ga­tors in their efforts to deter­mine who is behind the attack. Without inter­na­tional coop­er­a­tion the inves­ti­ga­tion has to stop at the IP address of the com­puter in a for­eign coun­try that was used in the attack.

    Reply
  6. ReconTeam says:
    September 1, 2009 at 7:29 pm

    Yes I am crazy, but I say we tear down the inter­net and rebuild a bet­ter one with­out 90% of the crap on the inter­net. Of course we need the right peo­ple to orga­nize the new inter­net.
    At the rate the world is going, why the hell not?

    Reply
  7. Mang says:
    September 1, 2009 at 7:32 pm

    Thanks Kevin, it makes more sense to me now.

    Reply
  8. stephen russell says:
    September 1, 2009 at 7:33 pm

    What can I do to be part of CyberSecurity?
    Strong PC skills (non pro­gram­ming,) Internet saavy,
    Who can use my skills.
    Need job even­tu­ally in Oahu HI as I plan to move there some­time.
    Oahu HI.
    Thanks.

    Reply
  9. gsak says:
    September 2, 2009 at 12:47 am

    SpyGuy, the point was that peo­ple make too big of a deal about cer­ti­fi­ca­tion and if the gov­ern­ment puts their weight behind it, it will just be a false sense of secu­rity. And, the issue of secu­rity tools being freely avail­able is some­thing that I think we should talk about.

    Reply
  10. gsak says:
    September 2, 2009 at 12:50 am

    Stephen Russell,
    Learn Japanese and become a spook. :)

    Reply
  11. lim hooi yew says:
    September 2, 2009 at 1:34 am

    i agree men!
    Have u not read the news even peo­ple with­out cer­ti­fi­ca­tion also can hack!
    Wat u think about it?
    even teen can hack C.I.A com­puter.
    It is not some­thing can be prove by paper

    Reply
  12. vfbj Red says:
    September 2, 2009 at 7:32 am

    I’m retired and I do not rel­ish the fed­eral Government giv­ing the pres­i­dent the right to sus­pend free speech. The Internet has become the strongest method of com­mu­ni­ca­tion. If they con­trol the inter­net what part of free speech will be con­trolled next. If gov­ern­ment wants to restrict gov­ern­ment com­put­erts then so be it but they need to stay away from per­sonal com­put­ers unless they are being used to ille­gally access infor­ma­tion whether it is gov­ern­ment or financial

    Reply
  13. TDS4S says:
    September 2, 2009 at 12:42 pm

    The the­sis sen­tence seems to be: “Cyber secu­rity must be esca­lated to a top pri­or­ity of the Obama admin­is­tra­tion.” I feel obliged to point out that noth­ing in the arti­cle sup­ports that the­sis.
    The fact that there are 190 mil­lion web sites doesn’t do any­thing to prove that cyber secu­rity must be ele­vated to at top pri­or­ity. Nor does the fact that 70% of emails are spam. Nor does the fact that there have been numer­ous warn­ings of impend­ing cyber threats. Nor does any­thing else writ­ten in the arti­cle. You make an asser­tion that we must pri­or­i­tize cyber secu­rity, but you don’t prove it.
    You gotta offer some evi­dence, Kevin. You can’t just say that “acts of cyber aggres­sion rep­re­sent the top transna­tional threat of the 21st Century” and expect me to accept it as truth with­out any proof. You get a lot of neg­a­tive com­ments on this site, Kevin, and one rea­son is that your arti­cles often con­sist of one asser­tion after another with zero proof that any of them are true.
    For the next arti­cle you write, try a new approach. Instead of mak­ing a bunch of spec­u­la­tive asser­tions that a cyber-​​terrorism dis­as­ter is right around the cor­ner, try mak­ing just one plau­si­ble asser­tion. Then prove it. And don’t use ran­dom Google-​​factoids like “there are 140 mil­lion blogs on the inter­net” — use facts that mat­ter. Assert a the­sis in the form of: “Cyber-​​terrorist threat X can crip­ple America through mech­a­nism Y”. Then present some fact to prove that Threat X exists. Then present facts to prove that Threat X is capa­ble of doing Mechanism Y. Then present facts to prove that Threat Y could, at least in the­ory, crip­ple America. Keep in mind that read­ers won’t accept the idea that even the most suc­cess­ful DOS attack on eBay or Yahoo would crip­ple America.
    Actual threat. Plausible mech­a­nism. Real dam­age. Proof of each. That would be nice.

    Reply
  14. gsak says:
    September 2, 2009 at 2:46 pm

    Cenobyte, have you ever worked IT in an enter­prise Exchange envi­ron­ment? Please give some exam­ples of how most per­sonal “inter­net” com­mu­ni­ca­tions are not email.
    Spam block­ing is bet­ter than it used to be, but it is still a prob­lem. Operating System patches take a while to be approved and tested. Social engi­neer­ing will always be a problem.

    Reply
  15. The Cenobyte says:
    September 2, 2009 at 3:19 pm

    When it comes to email (Which was not the major point of my post) I hon­estly can’t find any of the white papers I have read. However the basic issue is this, almost no one under the age of about 35 uses email at all any­more and users over that age send very few inter­net email (Mostly enter­prise email which is very very dif­fer­ent from SMTP) . Most users are switch­ing to or have switched to chat clients, SMS, twit­ter, black­berry and the like. The num­ber of peo­ple that are doing this grows every day, while the num­ber of legit­i­mate email mes­sages (Minus spam obvi­ously) is falling. People have learned that email has issues because it’s so open and easy to exploit and more or less stop using it.
    As to enter­prise work. I am a VP for enter­prise net­work archi­tec­ture for a very large US bank. I was until recently was in enter­prise secu­rity and dealt with secu­rity issues day in and day out. 99.99% of our data and net­work secu­rity issues where because of peo­ple doing dumb stuff, not com­put­ers being compromised.

    Reply
  16. Ed says:
    September 3, 2009 at 6:26 am

    I think for cyber secu­rity we should have our own virus to send back to the attack­ers that has that pic­ture of hillary show up on their desk­top. That would scare any­one from try­ing to be a hacker again!

    Reply
  17. gsak says:
    September 3, 2009 at 3:41 pm

    Cenobyte,
    Do your employ­ees not com­mu­ni­cate with other employ­ees of other com­pa­nies? And as to PDA-​​based email, RIM is not the only player.
    The best sum­mary is that cyber­se­cu­rity is often a big com­pro­mise between being per­mis­sive for the hap­pi­ness of the employ­ees, and restric­tive for the secu­rity of the company.

    Reply
  18. Frank says:
    September 3, 2009 at 6:22 pm

    It is clear most of you do not get the reports about the new com­puter viruses, the sharp increase in com­puter crime(82% is inter­na­tional), the numer­ous rootk­its that emerged this year, and num­ber of mali­cious web sites Google found via their scans.
    The fact is that cyber attacks against busi­nesses and gov­ern­ment sites and users are grow­ing by leaps and bounds. You all should do a bit of read­ing about the cur­rent state of secu­rity and get the infor­ma­tion that makes the sub­ject of this post timely and needed!

    Reply
  19. gsak says:
    September 4, 2009 at 9:51 am

    Yup– good post, Frank.

    Reply
  20. Brian B. says:
    September 15, 2009 at 12:04 pm

    Its not just Foreign Policy, there is an entire legal frame-​​work that needs to be con­sid­ered.
    Cyber is bor­der­less, how­ever the actual and poten­tial impacts are not. This is an area where the US should gen­tly lead rather than act in a uni­lat­eral fash­ion.
    The Russians are already call­ing for an out­law­ing of offen­sive cyber weapons, the irony shoul dnot be missed.
    The NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Center of Excellence in Estonia just held their first Legal and Policy Conference to start talk­ing about these issues.
    The cur­rent sta­tus quo is inadequate.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Today's Hottest Topics
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • BREAK-BREAK: Units to Get New Camo Revealed
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    Recent Comments
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      Artistically a very "nice" picture to look...
      Gus Claassens
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      You seem to have a problem with pictures of soldiers..
      MIKE
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      Easy Young Zandor, suppose this is just a photo op.. actually,...
      MIKE
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      Easy Young Zandor, suppose this is just a photo op.. actually,...
      MIKE
    • FSAPV-E and X Don’t Meet Expectations
      FINALLY, a comment worth reading. Comment on the...
      Scott
    • Northrop Invests Own Money In Fire Scout
      Yes,Charles,Phantom Works is Boeing.
      elgatoso
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
      They are going to have to look at the whole...
      Wembley
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      Just look at this " picture " for a moment. The...
      Zandor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      I know LOSAT seemed awesome but wasn't it cancelled? I...
      JimboJones
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
      Yes you're quite right, I get to witness...
      JimboJones
    Recent Articles
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
    • Pinnacle’s New Armor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
    • Northrop Invests Own Money In Fire Scout
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Super Cavitation and the Truth
    • Mantis Begins Search For Prey
    Recent Hot Topics
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Iraq Cyber Attack and the DigiSEALs
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
    • Grim Wanat Footage
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage