Keir Giles’ wrote a good paper that you really should read on the Russian view of the information warfare/operations (cyber warfare) legality. This is a fairly neglected aspect of information warfare studies and is completely ignored by cyber warfare experts in the West, who consider the Western view to be the sole view. It is because they are largely WEIRD. The West is largely in introspection around diversity, where diversity now means that everyone has the same values, shares same culture and is working towards the same goals in the similar fashion.
Another poll, another breathless doom and gloom prognostication. This time cyberwar is seen as top threat facing US: Cyberwarfare is the most serious threat facing the United States, according to almost half of US national security leaders who responded to the inaugural Defense News Leadership Poll, underwritten by United Technologies. If we skip over the details of the poll, some of it questionable due to the self-selection of the respondents (out of all the subscribers asked to respond to the survey only 9% did) and the slightly dubious truthfulness of the respondents to their actual ranks:
Repeat a lie three times and someone is bound to use it and reference you as a source of truth. Especially if the author of the unsubstantiated claim is from any intelligence agency. For some reason they are beyond fact-checking by news agencies. The quote that got my attention this time? Cyber attacks can be expensive: one unidentified London-listed company incurred losses of 800 million pounds ($1.29 billion) in a cyber attack several years ago, according to the British security services.
OK, so the title may be a bit insensitive. A bit. But only until you read, yet again, what some of the best and brightest military minds have to say about cyber security: In the early 1980s cyber fiction film, “War Games,” a young hacker played by Matthew Broderick almost managed to start World War III when he accidentally nearly launched nuclear strikes against the Soviet Union. It seemed unlikely in those relatively primitive days before the widespread use of the Internet, but it foreshadowed the emerging era of the profound intersection of national security and the cyber world.
Iran: How a Third Tier Cyber Power Can Still Threaten the United States | Atlantic Council I read the SitRep so you don’t have to. Unless you have time for silliness. In which case maybe you can read some other situation report that’s done by actual intelligence analysts. Anyway, the paper starts off with an interesting premise: >But what if the response came in the form of an anonymous cyber attack that shut down the New York Stock Exchange for a few hours?
Infrmation warfare limited to CNO and EW misses out on all the aspects where information isn’t stored on machines.
Early analysis suggests that ‘Flame’ is a complex, sophisticated threat. In terms of the actual size of the programming code behind it, ‘Flame’ is massive. Depending on the source, though, ‘Flame’ is either the most dangerous, insidious malware threat ever discovered, or simply a solid cyber attack that caught much of the industry with its proverbial pants down. 'Flame': Lethal Cyberweapon or Media Hype? | PCWorld Business Center
Overall cyber space will be used to improve the operational effectiveness of the IDF, both during war and peace time. This will be done through clandestine activity, while maintaining confidentiality and expertise. IDF web site Dover.aspx
The other existential threat is cyber. The challenge for me and many other leaders is to really understand it. No longer can we delegate this to some part of our organization. Leaders have to understand it because leaders make decisions about investment, about policies and regulations. Management and Career - Interview with ex-Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen
A few months back, as part of my post-grad studies, I had to look into the viability of electronic warfare on a global scale. This is part one of many posts that will revisit that work and expand on it where applicable and reduce parts of it where. Abstract Information warfare is currently fought on two planes: first is the legal and diplomatic plane where Russia and China on one side, and United States and the Western world on the other are trying to pass globally acceptable resolutions on cyber arms control and the definition of, and use of information warfare.