Stop Calling Electronic Espionage Cyberwar
from the because-it's-not dept
Cyberwar. Cyberwar never changes, mostly because it has never existed. Since the dawn of the new millenium, when the movie Hackers was still Congress's best approximation of the threat of compromised computers, thoughts have been spilled in the name of expunging this stupid hyperbole, this made-up threat with a trumped-up enemy. We're told the threats are everywhere, from an Iranian government that provides more laughs than danger, to a pirate wing of the Chinese military, to simple psychotic terror-hacking wings. Sadly, it is left to a pathetically small few media members to push back against the nonsense.
If stealing secrets is an act of war then America is currently at war with all of its allies. Espionage is what governments do so they don’t have to go to war...directly. What appears to be upsetting the Congressman is that the Chinese are using espionage to make money in a way that the United States didn’t think of first.In the year 2013, after millenia of technological progress coupled with man's fear of it, the tidal wave of a complicit mainstream media could hold itself back no longer. As such, the world has been plunged into an abyss of cyber-nuclear threats, and bullshit.
The Times wasn’t content with using other peoples’ reports based on circumstantial evidence so it went out and got one of its own. The study by Mandiant has come under some fairly withering criticism.But this threat has not, as some have predicted, caused the end of the world. Instead, the fake apocalypse was just the prologue to another crappy chapter of human history. For man had succeded destroying the fourth estate for the betterment of the cyber-defense industry.
-It doesn’t appear to say anything new. CEO Kevin Mandia: "Mandiant’s not the first company to blame China for the hacks, but it was our turn to carry the ball for a little bit." Translation = “We were working for the NYT and that’s some golden PR.”
-Did I mention it was based on circumstantial evidence? Jeffrey Carr does a superb job of explaining why Mandiant saw exactly what it expected to find and then offers several other equally valid possible perpetrators, including Russia, France and Israel.
Here is my boilerplate response on the security weakness of U.S. utilities in regards to cyber attacks: "Yes, there is a problem. It is not a crisis. To do any significant damage any such attack would most likely have to be associated with a physical attack." (The sky is not falling, Chicken Little, but I bet I could make a whole lot of money convincing you otherwise.)Cyberwar. Cyberwar never changes, because it has never existed.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cybersecurity, cyberwar, espionage, exaggeration
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Last decade were the Muslims and terrorism now it's Whoever and Cyberwar. Pitiful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
7th, 2013 @ 6:09am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Anyways, as espionage is referred to as a shadow war, or an information war, whats wrong with keeping the cyberwar moniker?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I see what you did there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The illusion of a threat must be maintained in order to grant themselves extraordinary snooping and censorship powers. 'Cyberwar' may as well be a euphamism for 'internet control'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
-Declaration of Independence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually, the US has waged it offensively since 2007:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Actually, the US has waged it offensively since 2007:
Are you off duty again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Actually, the US has waged it offensively since 2007:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Actually, the US has waged it offensively since 2007:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/02/new-stuxnet-variant-found/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We need a more scary term than Cyberwar
The "terrorism" thing is starting to get old and wear thin. We can't go back to the Cold War. The populace is generally against the War on Drugs. So Cyberwar is the new bogey man for the next decade. Then it will be Nanowar or something.
The more ambiguous the enemy, the less measurable the progress fighting it, the better.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We need a more scary term than Cyberwar
What you do need an enemy for (one that is ambiguous and shadowy) is to strip away the rights of the people. For that, you can't have a way to measure success, and you can't have a definitive target.
"Oh, look cyber war!", "Oh look terrorism!" we can't let you have your civil liberties. Oh look it is working too. Now we stand like sheep to be searched before getting on a plane. We let the government monitor or calls. We let the government take away our rights, just a little more each day. For the Children.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: We need a more scary term than Cyberwar
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Simple fix to worries about a hacker launching a nuke, shutting off power grids, turning off life support or any other anti-social act: Don't connect key infrastructure or weapons of mass destruction to an open network.
The greatest hacker who ever lived can't hack a computer that is turned off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
what was that experiment of just dropping contaminated USB drives outside a corporate headquarters targeted for infiltration called?
The employees would pick them up and insert them into company computers just to see what they contained.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thank You!
I tell my clients everyday that they don't need to buy the latest wiz bang canned linux 'appliance' to protect them from the new threat (in reality the same threat that has existed for the last 10 years).
There are a set of best practices to securing your systems. There are some relatively minor changes to those practices over the years, but nothing that approaches the sky is falling scenarios pushed by the government and IT companies wanting you to spend $$$ on the wiz bang must have security doohickey (a technical term). Keep only the information you need, keep it well secured, monitor logs... It isn't rocket science to keep a system secure. The sky isn't falling and your company and it's data will still be here tomorrow if you simply remain vigilant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's a reason why they call it cyberwar
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So even though drug laws were not working, politicians were not willing to change the laws. It took voter initiatives to get marijuana legal in some states, not brave politicians.
If we call the mere use of a computer to commit crimes a cyberwar, we're going to waste hundreds of millions of dollars and ruin countless lives in this "war," without solving a single problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If I go to bead and the roads are clear, and I wake up and the roads are covered with snow, that's circumstantial evidence that it snowed while I was asleep. Pretty powerful, reliable, circumstantial evidence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Based on your 'circumstantial evidence' you could make the statement that, "Me sleeping causes it snow at night."
Since obviously the two events were correlated this could be a possible 'assumption', but you would be jumping to conclusions to imply causation just because of correlation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
In fact, circumstantial evidence is often more reliable than direct evidence (e.g., eyewitness identifications).
What conclusion you draw from any particular type of evidence is, of course, a different issue. But criticizing any conclusion simply because it's based on "circumstantial evidence" merely demonstrates the critic's shortcomings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Testimony can be direct evidence or it can be circumstantial. If the witness claims they saw the crime take place, this is considered direct evidence. For instance, a witness saying that the defendant stabbed the victim is direct evidence. By contrast, a witness who says that she saw the defendant enter a house, that she heard screaming, and that she saw the defendant leave with a bloody knife gives circumstantial evidence."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This does support what the AC I was replying to says: that neither "circumstantial" or "direct" should imply how reliable the evidence is. Eyewitness testimony is famously amongst the least reliable evidence that you can have.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And I think I will remove your quota of Nuka-Cola now... don't blame me... blame the Cyberwar with the Enclave, you only have yourself to blame
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Answer:
Our US Government !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For all things there's a quote somewhere...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why would any sane American declare war on all of its allies? The insane act of screaming “fire” in a crowded theater comes to mind. One must ask who profits by the scrambling of duped investors, citizens and politicians? Efforts to expand an agencies powers? Companies that profit by such a panic?
It seems like a culture of war. How do we ween the public and our government from this teat of psychological dependence? Its normal that we live in conflict but calling everyday life war is too much. Of course this it a derivative of Bushi Boy's (W) “war on terror” which is a massive PR mistake for the US.
Destroyed is our reputation as the defender of human rights. (we cannot even protect our own basic rights to privacy and access to our own culture (history)) Destroyed is our ability to impartially mediate foreign wars and conflicts. (no way to mediate middle east problems impartially now) Destroyed is our economic mobility to enter markets unavailable to any other country. (a real democracy was a powerful advantage) Revealed is our empire building efforts of the last few administrations to such an extent that it embarrasses me. (did we really invade an oil producing nation for no real reason?) Obvious are the attempts to suppress dissent, of any kind, where reason and public discussion prevail. (new world order protest suppression) Gone are the most basic constitutional protections we based our entire democratic society on. (warrant-less wiretapping rampant)
the “war on terror” as implemented by the last two administrations is an anathema on traditional American values and must be stopped. It has been waged offensively and intruded into world affairs much like a random drone strike. The collateral damage to American standards is uncountable.
Please keep in mind that congress has officially declared a war on terror. “The war on terror is starting to get thin.” (thanks DannyB) I hereby propose that congress repeal the “war on terror” declaration immediately and post haste. (and along with that the unofficial “war on drugs” too I'm sure the removal of any real terrorists monetary (cocaine and heroin sales) support would be cause for some real world changing, for the better, event.)
This deceleration of a war on terror is (most likely unconstitutional in itself) so vague and indescribable that it in itself is a license to do just about anything. There is no concrete enemy defined so basically the enemy... is you and me. Civil liberties, Bill of Rights, individual freedoms... have become dirty words for enforcement agencies and for unfathomable reasons ignored by the courts.
Some of this is reactionary to the good comments. Thanks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cyber attacks
And what would the response be to such satellite attacks? Fuming, some nasty statements, and little else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]