By Kevin Coleman
Defense Tech Chief Cyber War Correspondent
If you read recent comments by White House Cyber Security Coordinator Howard Schmidt, that’s the conclusion you might draw. The web posting titled “Howard Schmidt Dismisses Cyber War Fears” has left many asking — does the left hand know what the right hand is saying?
Troubling Comments in the post:
Schmidt, in a face-to-face interview with GovInfoSecurity.com, said the federal government and the private businesses that control 85 percent of the nation’s critical IT infrastructure are better positioned than ever to fend off massive digital assaults.
Well, I guess that could be true; however, that could leave many to believe we have an appropriate level of defense, are safe and we need not invest in cyber defense. These are two points with which I strongly disagree.
Schmidt questioned whether such an event as a cyber war can exist. “A cyber war is just something that we can’t define,” he said. “I don’t even know (how a) cyber war would benefit anybody.”
How about the benefits a terrorist organization would gain by misadjusting the computerized supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) controls on a water treatment facility and making people ill. That would cause a fair amount of disruption and case fear throughout the nation. That being said, given Schmidt’s comments questioning if a cyber war could exist – next I expect he will want to cancel Cyber Command!
Schmidt’s comments came at the conference and time as FBI Director Robert Mueller called on the U.S. law enforcement and the security community to collaborate with international governments and pursue investigations further in order to combat what appears to be a losing arms race with cyber criminals.
Now read this web article called “Cyber Attacks Are Exploding in Congress” – it takes both sides at the same time. That article states that Congress and other government agencies are constantly under a cyber attack on an average of 1.8 billion times a month.
The posting went on to say that the Senate Security Operations Center alone receives 13.9 million of those attempted attacks per day. Senate Sergeant-at-Arms went on to state, “We operate in an escalating attack environment in which threats to our information infrastructure are increasing in both frequency and sophistication.” He also said “It’s a continued and constant threat. Our adversaries are getting sharper, and we have to be sharper.” The Senate Sergeant-at-Arms also said he thinks we’re safe – somewhat of contradiction to his other comments.
All this on the heels of last week’s Congressional testimony by former Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell that the country was in the midst of a cyber war that it was losing. He also believes that coming cyber attacks will cause more economic damage to our country than the attacks on 9/11.
Just when I was about to file Schmidt’s comments under “things that make my head hurt” it came to me. There is only one explanation – This is all part of a massive disinformation initiative meant to confuse our cyber adversaries. I bet it works because it is confusing many of us as well.
{ 23 comments… read them below or add one }
Atleast we can hope thats the plan
The word “ill” should have a question mark after it.
Howard Schmidt won't "cancel" Cyber Command, he'll just give it to Blue State to run.
Terrorists hacking into water treatment plants and nuclear reactors is way too 24. Go simple – attack the financial sector in a major way during the recession recovery. Do they maintain redundancies of the systems and data? Sure they do, one such data center is getting built a couple miles away from me right now. But redundancies won't stop a complete crisis of confidence once the media latches on and compounds the problem.
Good Morning Folks,
Creating a Military Cyber Command was a mistake and it good that it’s been acknowledged as soon as it has. This area of security belongs either in the Department of Justice or The department of Homeland Security.
Nearly all of the departments of the Federal Government involved in National Security are non-military. That said cyber problems outside of US legal jurisdiction would automatically involve the US military and the CIA. The military should definitely be kept ON THE LOOP on Cyber Issues.
It is likely that any problems in this area would take place outside of the militaries legal jurisdiction. The Military would just become another level(s) of bureaucratic interference in dealing with the problem.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
Read the fine print. U.S. Cyber Command is not mandated to protect civilian infrastructure from cyber attack. It is designed to protect military networks from cyber attack. The only time Cyber Command would conceivably get involved in civilian network defense in the U.S. is AFTER some sort of Cyber Attack has taken place, and only at the request of civil authorities and authorized by the President or Secretary of Defense. It works the same way military involvement in Katrina did: military cannot act until civil authorities request help and it is authorized by SECDEF/President. If civil authorities never ask for help, or ask too late, the military can prepare all they want but they can't act.
It's hard to comment on this topic unless you have a low-level understanding experience. So let's calibrate a minimum, this way:
If you haven't, at least, installed or used Wireshark, you may not be at the "Minimum Level of Understanding" that this subject really requires. I know you're smart, and you have an opinion. But you wouldn't give an opinion on starfruit farming, would you? No, you wouldn't, because it's not interesting and you don't have experience.
Well, this *is* interesting, and you still don't have experience. It leaves few qualified to comment.
You point is?
Wireshark is cheating. Real men use tcpdump, snoop, tripwire, and nmap, from the command line! (I kid.)
It's all a fantasy right? Even NATO says so, oh wait… http://www.zopag.com/news/china-has-declared-a-cy...
Actually your post wasn't the last post when I wrote that. I have no idea why it placed it after yours. It wasn't directed at you.
Thanks!
@Earlydawn
I hate to bring this up but ….
Your comment that "Terrorists hacking into water treatment plants and nuclear reactors is way too 24." Is absolutely incorrect! There are multiple reports of both having taken place internationally and the investigations are solid and on-going. Most of these reports have a very high degree of confidence that the reports/events are accurate. Two weeks ago one of the two came up again in a DC area briefing I attended.
Kevin
On your comment that – "This is all part of a massive disinformation initiative meant to confuse our cyber adversaries." My belief is that it is not only to confuse our adversaries but to give the US populous a "sense" of security. With over 20 years of IT experience I believe that if the general population knew a fraction of how real the threat IS and how vulnerable our way of life really is they’d freak out. For one thing it would kill all this ‘CHEAP” off shore IT, finance and engineering work conducted over the WEB.
But just remember that even if you are paranoid it doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.
I keep telling people if a computer is hooked to the Internet it can be hacked, sooner or later someone will do it. Don't care what kind of software, somebody will find a way around it or a hole in it, and then the nightmare begins.
My computer is the heart of my Business and I use a simple system, Two computers one hooked to the net and one which is not. Anything from the secure machine is transferred via cd to the internet machine, no outside cds or software are loaded on the secure machine, no cds from the internet machine are ever loaded on the secure machine, no USB drives or Zip drives are allowed in the office. Hackers have toasted a couple of my internet computers, but after the first time it hasn't cost me any more business.
I think the reference to a cyber war means two sides attacking each other through the internet. Probably the definition inferred. Of course, anything electronic can be invaded. The best defense is probed and the attackers learn how to break as cyber combat is an constantly evolving environment. Cyber offense and defense will soon (if not already completely) be as powerful or more powerful than modern shells, missiles (not nukes), and bullets.
We may find ourselves living and dying by the 0s and 1s like a defense football coach scheming his blitz package on Xs and Os.
Byron, it really helps if you know what agencies and organizations (including the military) do what. I mean, otherwise, you sound very official and in-the-know.
Michael P, I'll say just this: a cyber war, just like a conventional one, doesn't need an exchange so much as it needs an aggressor and a victim.
I truly believe that it is a political statement. This is Obama's boy remember. When Obama came into office, the first thing that he did in the name of Political corrrectness was to kill the term "Global War on Terror".
He claimed that we were not in a global war on terror and that the term rubbed some of our "allies" the wrong way. So he renamed it the "Overseas Contingency Operation" it is much less intimidating to terrorists, I mean certain allies…
So in honor of Mr. Schmidt, we shall remove the term "Cyberwar" and rename it the "Internet Police Action", err, "Online correction of wayward youths", how about the Electronic Contingencty Operation, umm…
Where does Obama and crew find these people, a first year IT student would have more of a clue than Mr. Schmidt does. Lets see water as you mentioned, power grid, telecom systems, computer control systems for simply scads of industrial plants (chemical and oil refineries top the list for me, Bopal India ring any bells?), Automated Landing systems at airports, and the list go on right down to your laptop sitting on your desk. 10,000 little hackers with a good set of lets say Chinese Mil Spec hack software and let say they go after something soft like all the computer controlled traffic lights in major cities…… Even with a 1% rate of success it would be a major mess, and this clown thinks we are good to go on this and he doesn't see why anyone would even try! This so not funny, anyone for a cyber 9/11?
who's watching "the watchers?"
Good Morning Folks,
To poster who questioned what agencies do what, it really doesn’t matter. Cyber command is a Military Organization thus subject to the provision of the “Posse Comitatus Act” and follow up laws that restricts the Militaries ability to operate in the United States and its territories.
The courts would have to assume that any non military group either Federal or non Federal would be operating under Military Jurisdiction. This of course would make any prosecution nearly impossible.
Now we could go to a system like the UK has where a non judicial warrant can be issued as in the case of the UK by the Home Officer (HOW) which is not part of the judicial system and let the courts decide what selective evidence can or can’t be used in a trial.
It is of note that since 1909 and the enactment of this warrant that most people involved in violations of the “Official Secrets Act” engaging in espionage or attempted sabotage have not gone to trial, even during the two World Wars. Trials usually are reserved for issues that involve actual espionage, an event of sabotage, or the killing of a military or governmental official where, the death penalty was a factor.
The max. penalty in the UK for this type of offense is 25 years but is very negotiable.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
Mr. Schmidt's comments are cavalier at best and point more towards the uninformed. There is not a piece of intelligence, tactical, logistic and financial data that does not touch a TCP/IP network at some Mr. Schmidt should have spent some time chatting with the Cold War, ELINT, crowd to gain a better understanding for being at the receiving end of a CCCP barrage jamming session. The entire RF spectrum was denied. It was not a particularly sophisticated approach, but it was done at such power and frequency shifting that for all intents and purposes you were denied access to the spectrum.
Today's military is increasingly net centric and command and control is at risk from cyber-attacks. Our National Security depends on a comprehensive strategy to preempt, detect and counter cyber-attacks. The problem is further amplified by the outsourcing of technology to cheap labor markets.
You can rest assured that China, India and other industrialized nations are investing heavily in cyber countermeasures.
Wake up Mr. Schmidt!
The British had a scary thought about cyberwar in a recent Timesonline article:
"The threats and scenarios of cyberwar require some sideways thinking. British assessments conclude, for example, that the risk of a serious attack in this country is still lower than that of a flu pandemic — but that a flu pandemic would be a lot worse if combined with an attack on NHS computer systems involved in vaccine distribution." – http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech...
The combination of a natural disaster, epidemic, or military invasion with cyber attacks would be very disruptive indeed…
Ptsfp
cyberarms.wordpress.com