Trump Joins Clinton In Pushing For Cyberwar

from the well,-that's-just-great dept

Wed, Oct 5th 2016 9:37am — Mike Masnick

We've noted a few times in the past our serious concerns about Hillary Clinton's hawkish and tone deaf views on cybersecurity, in which she wants the US to go on the offensive on cyberattacking, even being willing to respond to attacks with real world military responses. She seems to ignore the fact that the US has a history of being some of the most aggressive players on offense on such things (Stuxnet, anyone?), and doesn't seem to recognize how escalating such situations may not end well at all.

Of course, her opponent, Donald Trump has been totally incomprehensible on cybersecurity during the course of his campaign. There was his first attempt to respond to questions about cybersecurity in which it's not clear he understood the question, and started talking about nuclear weapons instead. Or the time he took a question on cybersecurity and answered by talking about the latest CNN poll. Or, of course, who can forget his debate performance on the topic, where his key insights were that his 10 year old was good with computers and a 400 lb. hacker may be responsible for the DNC hacks.

It appears that the Trump campaign finally decided that maybe Trump should say something marginally coherent on the subject, and sent him out earlier this week with a prepared teleprompter speech, which Trump actually managed to get through without going too far off script. And... it's basically the same kind of bullshit as Clinton -- pushing for more aggressive and offensive cyberattacks.

“I will also ask my secretary of Defense and joint chiefs to present recommendations for strengthening and augmenting our Cyber Command,” Trump said of his cybersecurity plan. “As a deterrent against attacks on our critical resources, the United States must possess, and has to, the unquestioned capacity to launch crippling cyber counterattacks, and I mean crippling. Crippling. This is the warfare of the future. America’s dominance in this area must be unquestioned, and today it’s totally questioned.”

There was also the kind of hilarious claim that the government has not made cybersecurity issues a priority, which is laughable if you've been paying attention to, well, anything in the "cybersecurity" policy space over the past few years. You could say that their priorities within that realm are screwed up. Or that the government seems to mainly use "cybersecurity" as a cloak to hide NSA surveillance efforts. But to argue that it's not been a priority is clearly false.

And, really, having our own side launching "crippling" cyberattacks (as with Clinton's plan) doesn't seem like the most effective plan. These kinds of things only escalate. Being an aggressor here seems particularly shortsighted. Taking out, say, China's internet, may show strength, but for what purpose? Will it really stop Chinese computer attacks on US infrastructure? Doubtful. Cybersecurity is mostly a defensive game, and it should remain that way. Encrypt everything possible. Disconnect critical infrastructure from the wider network wherever possible, and do everything to stop attackers from getting in, taking down, or mucking with systems.

This hawkish talk about offensive attacks in response to inbound online attacks is probably poll-tested to sound good as "being tough," but it's really stupid actual policy.

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: computer security, cyberattack, cybersecurity, cyberwar, donald trump, hillary clinton, offensive

33 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

The First Word

“

The last 2 paragraphs are gold

I wish every policy maker understood the concepts there.

—Anonymous Coward

”

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

I.T. Guy, 5 Oct 2016 @ 9:46am

"Of course, her opponent, Donald Trump has been totally incomprehensible on cybersecurity during the course of his campaign."

Of course, her opponent, Donald Trump has been totally incomprehensible on "The Cyber" during the course of his campaign. FTFY. :)

So... what we are finding out is... there is not much of a difference in the two after all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I.T. Guy, 5 Oct 2016 @ 9:49am

Ill bet dollars to doughnuts Hills will win. The FBI already knows who their new boss will be:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-03/fbi-allowed-2-hillary-aides-destroy-their-laptops-newly- exposed-side-agreements
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 9:52am

They added "cyber" to the discourse.
It should have been a sign that incoherent and insane speech would come afterwards. I don't recall any tech expert that matters using the word cyber outside of quoting some idiocy so far..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Oct 2016 @ 9:56am

A real Cyberwar will lead to one thing, cutting of undersea data cables. Then...maybe...we will learn how stupid it is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Oct 2016 @ 10:13am

This sounds like US corporations uber alles.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Oct 2016 @ 10:46am

The last 2 paragraphs are gold
I wish every policy maker understood the concepts there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AJ, 5 Oct 2016 @ 10:48am

Presidential Election 2016!!! Criminal Vrs Ass-Clown ...Now all we need is Simon Cowell and that Maniac Chef Ramsey as judges and we'd have us an awesome TV serious on our hands.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, 5 Oct 2016 @ 10:49am

Re:
Well, on this issue.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to say there's a pretty big difference between them on *some* issues.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, 5 Oct 2016 @ 10:51am

Re: They added "cyber" to the discourse.
McAfee at one point said he was going to run under the Cyber Party, though I'm not sure if he counts as a tech expert that matters.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TasMot (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 10:56am

A CyberWar is like a Boat
I've heard a saying that a boat is just a hole in the water that you keep throwing money in. This Cyberwar is just going to be another "war" like the war on drugs, where our tax dollars are going to disappear down a dark hole, never to be seen again (well except as some corporate executives private jet).

Once it starts (and I'm guessing that it already has, Stuxnet anybody) it will never end. It will just be talking points, secret interpretations of secret laws and a very big bill for taxpayers. There will never ever be the part of the story that says "The End".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Some Dude, 5 Oct 2016 @ 10:56am

Re: Presidential Election 2016
If we sell PPV tickets to the rest of the world, we could pay off the national debit, fund health care, provide funds for education... We could be buried in money!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Oct 2016 @ 11:06am

Re: A CyberWar is like a Boat
"This Cyberwar is just going to be another "war" like the war on drugs, where our tax dollars are going to disappear down a dark hole, never to be seen again (well except as some corporate executives private jet)."

And this "war" will be waged against us, the citizens, taxpayers and potential draftees.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JoeCool (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 11:13am

Re:
Still awaiting the sad-but-true button...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 11:29am

Re: Re: They added "cyber" to the discourse.
Take him with a grain of salt.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Roger Strong (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 11:34am

Re:
The deal was that the FBI destroyed the laptops AFTER they searched them.

Even your Russia Today mirror site mentions this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Oct 2016 @ 11:37am

The War...
"I do not know what weapons the First Cyber War will be fought with, but I do know that the Second Cyber War will be fought with old IBM mainframes, 1980s micros and an occasional still-functional 1960s troposcatter link."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Roger Strong (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 11:40am

"You know what? The fact that somebody can dot the i’s and cross the t’s on a foreign leader’s geographic location then allows them to put our military in harm’s way."
- Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson, defending his unfamiliarity with world affairs

By Johnson's reckoning, a President who is pig-ignorant about internet matters might be a good thing.

/s
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BentFranklin (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 12:01pm

Stupid fucks don't realize that cyberwar will be fought on our territory?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
bob, 5 Oct 2016 @ 12:46pm

If you thought the collateral damage from drone attacks was high, just wait till you see governments try to launch crippling attacks in cyberspace.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Oct 2016 @ 1:04pm

The USA has screwed over a lot of weaker countries in the last half century. IF it comes to war they could be facing a coalition of dozens of countries that want revenge
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Padpaw (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 1:04pm

Re:
why does this website keep signing me out, i don't even notice until i have posted
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Groaker (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 1:15pm

DC is a nothing but a very large mental institution, specializing in the (lack of) care for those who live fantasy lives of grandiosity completely separate from the reality of the suffering they cause.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Stosh, 5 Oct 2016 @ 1:29pm

Protection
Well at least we will have "backdoors" in our encryption so the government can tell which of our classified servers are hacked. Kinda like going to war and not tying the laces on your combat boots....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 2:40pm

Re: Re: They added "cyber" to the discourse.
Any chance of getting KatieBailey banned or held for moderation? It's nothing but a spambot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Oct 2016 @ 2:48pm

Collossal Ignorance of Consequences
I think of Stuxnet as an ill-conceived proof-of-concept app with which the U.S and "friends" foolishly demonstrated that pretty much any system, air-walled or otherwise, CAN BE HACKED, if the would-be hacker has nation-state level resources, and that was before the new-&-improved vulnerabilities associated with the Internet of Things.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dismembered3po (profile), 5 Oct 2016 @ 2:51pm

Define "Interesting..."
Wait...so.

Weanwhile, at the Kremlin, Putin leaves the treaty we negotiated to reduce stockpiles of weapons-grade plutonium, introduces a bill in the parliament to halt talks on Syria unless we reduce our military presence in countries that joined NATO after 2000. (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37539616)

Trump and Clinton decide just to piss him off more?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Oct 2016 @ 2:55pm

this election is one for the books. it's like watching a movie where both of the principle characters are bad guys.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Oct 2016 @ 8:49pm

Re:
Don't jinx us!
I already live in hell and i don't need you giving anybody ideas!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wendy Cockcroft (profile), 6 Oct 2016 @ 5:54am

Re: Re:
I'd pay good money to see that. Hell, I'd even fly Stateside to see it live!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Oct 2016 @ 6:20am

Re:
I would include wallstreet in that assessment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
American people, 6 Oct 2016 @ 8:53am

CYBERWAR IS SCARY! Make America safe again by taking all of our rights!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wyrm (profile), 6 Oct 2016 @ 12:10pm

"There was his first attempt to respond to questions about cybersecurity in which it's not clear he understood the question, ..."

Let me fix that:

"There was his first attempt to respond to questions about cybersecurity in which it's clear he didn't understand the question, ..."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Mayor, 6 Oct 2016 @ 5:00pm

CYBERSECURITY STAKEHOLDERS
Simply put, our "Cybersecurity Stakeholders", include: our Business Primary Sector, our NGO+NPO Primary Sector and our Bureaucratic Primary Sector!... and therefore, ALL THREE PRIMARY SECTORS must be at the proverbial table!... and!... ALL THREE PRIMARY SECTORS must have an "equal vote" re the setting of our "Cybersecurity Principles", and the setting of our "Cybersecurity Policies" to be adopted, and implemented! Politicians!... however!... should be an AFTERTHOUGHT!
.
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in thread ]