U.S. Redefines Cyberspace in an Effort to Deny Cyberwar?

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Don Eijndhoven

44a2e0804995faf8d2e3b084a1e2db1d

US Government to Redefine CyberSpace in Effort to Deny CyberWar?

In as early as 2004 the various Armed Services of the United States publicly called Cyberspace a new warfighting domain.

Now, several years and a whole lot of international incidents later, Cyber Security and Cyber Warfare have become common topics of conversation inside governments, corporations, national laboratories and think-tanks.

imageOver 120 countries worldwide have ramped up efforts to defend themselves against cyber attacks, and are no doubt making sure that they have cyber capabilities of their own.

That cyber attacks are a reality have been made abundantly clear to the US government by outside events as well as multiple successful penetrations of the Pentagon network. Subsequent wargames and reports reveal that the US is very vulnerable to such attacks, and in this they are certainly not the only one.

America's military forces are some of the most active entities in the Cyber Warfare scene, with their Department of Defense taking a leading role in creating one of the world's first Cyber Commands (USCYBERCOM).

Several of the industrial complexes that serve the US Government and its armed forces have also started to smell the proverbial coffee, already making Millions (if not Billions) by actively servicing the many requests they receive by their largest customer. While Europe is slowly moving to a similar state, America is the place where new developments are happening.

Imagine my surprise when rumors reached me of a new movement by the current US government administration to redefine Cyberspace as an Innovative Domain rather than a Warfighting Domain, exactly the opposite of current DoD Doctrine.

While I can not reveal them, credible sources have informed me that the Obama administration is going to some lengths to move away from 'Cyber Warfare Terminology'. The reasoning is that if Cyberspace is considered an Innovative Domain (IE. Technological) rather than a Warfighting Domain (IE. Military), the embarrassment of being vulnerable to attack is somehow magically diminished.

It would stop being a mostly military matter -no doubt pleasing the various IT Security guru's critical of Cyber Warfare, Armed Forces investments in cyber warfare might suddenly find a 'better use' and this would eventually require far less of the National budget than is currently allotted. Of course this is just a pipe dream, but there it is.

Seeing as how these are currently just rumors that I can not substantiate with any real proof, there is little more that I can say about it. However, if these rumors turn out to be true then the US military industrial complex may take quite a hit through diminishing requests by its government and interesting times will surely be here.

Are there really people daft enough in the US Government to completely ignore the evidence of Cyber Warfare that is already out there?

The attacks on the Pentagon networks, the plundering of its email servers, the 2007 attacks on Estonia, the 2008 attacks on Georgia and the 2009 attacks on both the US as well as South Korea should sway any sane person from the notion that denial will solve the problem.

I can't safely say that current spending will do anything to lessen the threat, but spending less certainly won't help the situation. Is the Obama Administration really up for an Ostrich Award?

Cross-posted from ArgentConsulting.nl 

Possibly Related Articles:
5930
Policy
Federal
DoD Attacks National Security Cyber Warfare Cyber Defense USCYBERCOM
Post Rating I Like this!
B71b97ceae7b5837b59813ee06a34bed
David Dennis Considering the amount of resources given to black operations, recasting cyberspace as something less militarily focused is really a semantic change. The fact that there will be less official talk of cyber capabilities allows the black funding to continue with less public oversight. Stuxnet was not developed under public scrutiny, nor were many cyberdefense firms involved. That kind of development will likely not stop. It was always black and will stay black.

Official US policy also proscribes assassination, but how much difference is there between Predator drones "disabling command and control nodes" of terrorist organizations in Pakistan and assassinating terrorist leaders?
1305163146
44a2e0804995faf8d2e3b084a1e2db1d
Don Eijndhoven Thats an excellent point, and I agree that its a semantic change. Im a bit of a language enthusiast and I find it very interesting how certain expressions allow for action while others restrict it. I don't know that this semantic change relates directly to black ops, but if its true it could open up much more.
1305181881
Default-avatar
Bill Ross I have heard form three different sources to stop using the idea of Cyber Warfare for corporate cyber attacks and etc. This is BS. We are at war every single day. I have special ops and low intensity conflict experience and not a day goes by that I do not feel that I am fighting a persistent guerilla war.
1305240534
44a2e0804995faf8d2e3b084a1e2db1d
Don Eijndhoven Well, from what I hear most people at the DoD agree with your stance. I personally agree as well.
1305270920
B71b97ceae7b5837b59813ee06a34bed
David Dennis The main problem isn't what you or I believe cyberwar is, but what society overall thinks it is. You can't take legitimate action against the Sony incursions (for example) if people can't agree what to call the incident. Was it...

1. An embarrassing incident, but nothing more because nothing physical was harmed in the incursion;
2. A criminal act involving private individuals/companies;
3. An criminal conspiracy, subject to RICO or other statutes meant to control organized crime;
4. An intrusion with national security implications, which usually falls under the rubric of cyberwar;
5. A corporate failure of service where I might lose my levels or character holdings and Sony may be subject to civil liability.

Just because the Internet neighborhood we live in seems to be deteriorating and that some people out there are actually enemy soldiers, it doesn't mean that some people aren't just garden variety thugs.
1305305945
The views expressed in this post are the opinions of the Infosec Island member that posted this content. Infosec Island is not responsible for the content or messaging of this post.

Unauthorized reproduction of this article (in part or in whole) is prohibited without the express written permission of Infosec Island and the Infosec Island member that posted this content--this includes using our RSS feed for any purpose other than personal use.