4 ms·

Cyber weapons mean that during a crisis, nuclear militaries have to consider whether their chain of command has been compromised. WHich means they are, in fact

Cyber weapons mean that during a crisis, nuclear militaries have to consider whether their chain of command has been compromised. WHich means they are, in fact, as dangerous as nukes.

flukus 9y ago
Only if cyber weapons are built to target the military. I'd wager they're built to wage economic warfare rather than any military role, the corporate/commercial world is a much softer target. Imagine doing the economic/industrial damage of carpet bombing cities but without firing a shot.
nickpsecurity 9y ago
Launching a pile of nukes can kill tens to hundreds of millions of people. People have been launching cyberweapons since they were invented with death toll low enough that folks still reference THERAC in software deaths. Don't play: the two are barely comparable in how many they kill.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- mopierotti 9y ago
  I think the point was that cyber weapons are effectively as dangerous as nukes because they could cause nukes to be launched.
  - nickpsecurity 9y ago
    That's a better point but nukes run on a combo of ancient hardware using dedicated lines and physical presence. They're still reaching if that's the argument.
    - ocschwar 9y ago
      Read up if you can afford to lose sleep tonight: https://theamericanscholar.org/our-nuclear-future/# https://theamericanscholar.org/our-nuclear-future/# GIven that "cyber attacks," that is remotely tampering with telecom equipment, are as old as the Arab Israeli war of 1948, I'm not ready to be reassured by the antiquated hardware the US and Russia use for C&C
      - nickpsecurity 9y ago
        How bout you tell me all the deaths and property damage that has happened from nuclear weapons detonated by hackers. Ill cross-reference it against all the financial, property, or other damage from hackers without nukes. We'll see which has been higher to determine what worries people should invest security money in.
- dredmorbius 9y ago
  Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. Global systemic risk is increasing. Masssive infrastructure and response disruption can be devastating. What was the worst powerplant disaster in history? What was the primary kill mechanism? Related: http://www.feasta.org/2012/06/17/trade-off-financial-system-supply-chain-cross-contagion-a-study-in-global-systemic-collapse/ http://www.feasta.org/2012/06/17/trade-off-financial-system-...
  - nickpsecurity 9y ago
    I totally agree. I think the root of the disagreement is subjective word "scariest." Apparently, a nuclear disaster happening in a random place is the scariest thing for the rest of you. For me and possibly majority of Americans, the scariest thing is what might happen to us. Especially if the odds are high with us seeing reminders in the media. Rogue, nuclear weapon doesn't scare me. Increasingly automated cars, unpatched cellphones, legal ID's hard go fix when stolen, or bank/medical/government/databases compromised all worry me more since they can impact me and happen a lot. SCADA, too, if non-nuclear given it might be my power plant or utility.
    - dredmorbius 9y ago
      Hint: it wasn't nuclear. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam Though I also make the argument that the book hasn't been closed on our nuclear disasters, and won't be. For tens of thousands of years. Banqiao, however, has been fully resolved. (It occurred in 1975.)
- koide 9y ago
  I believe the parent meant that cyberweapons can be used to launch nuclear weapons without authorization. Which I'm not sure is actually feasible...
rl3 9y ago
>Cyber weapons mean that during a crisis, nuclear militaries have to consider whether their chain of command has been compromised. Good luck compromising nuclear arms C&C. There's a reason a lot of it runs on systems from the 70s.
- qb45 9y ago
  Maybe in the US and Russia. I wonder if it could be pirated Windows XP in North Korea, OTOH ;)
  - ben_w 9y ago
    Well, the UK has what is pejoratively called "Windows for Warships: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_Command_System#SMCS-NG_as_first_deployment_of_.22Windows_for_Warships.22 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_Command_System#SMC...
    - qb45 9y ago
      Reminds me of this classic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Yorktown_%28CG-48%29#Smart_ship_testbed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Yorktown_%28CG-48%29#Smart... On 21 September 1997, while on maneuvers off the coast of Cape Charles, Virginia, a crew member entered a zero into a database field causing an attempted division by zero in the ship's Remote Data Base Manager, resulting in a buffer overflow which brought down all the machines on the network, causing the ship's propulsion system to fail.

Cyber weapons mean that during a crisis, nuclear militaries have to consider whether their chain of command has been compromised. WHich means they are, in fact, as dangerous as nukes.

flukus 9y ago

Only if cyber weapons are built to target the military. I'd wager they're built to wage economic warfare rather than any military role, the corporate/commercial world is a much softer target. Imagine doing the economic/industrial damage of carpet bombing cities but without firing a shot.

nickpsecurity 9y ago

Launching a pile of nukes can kill tens to hundreds of millions of people. People have been launching cyberweapons since they were invented with death toll low enough that folks still reference THERAC in software deaths. Don't play: the two are barely comparable in how many they kill.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
mopierotti 9y ago
I think the point was that cyber weapons are effectively as dangerous as nukes because they could cause nukes to be launched.
- nickpsecurity 9y ago
  That's a better point but nukes run on a combo of ancient hardware using dedicated lines and physical presence. They're still reaching if that's the argument.
  - ocschwar 9y ago
    Read up if you can afford to lose sleep tonight: https://theamericanscholar.org/our-nuclear-future/# https://theamericanscholar.org/our-nuclear-future/# GIven that "cyber attacks," that is remotely tampering with telecom equipment, are as old as the Arab Israeli war of 1948, I'm not ready to be reassured by the antiquated hardware the US and Russia use for C&C
    - nickpsecurity 9y ago
      How bout you tell me all the deaths and property damage that has happened from nuclear weapons detonated by hackers. Ill cross-reference it against all the financial, property, or other damage from hackers without nukes. We'll see which has been higher to determine what worries people should invest security money in.
dredmorbius 9y ago
Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. Global systemic risk is increasing. Masssive infrastructure and response disruption can be devastating. What was the worst powerplant disaster in history? What was the primary kill mechanism? Related: http://www.feasta.org/2012/06/17/trade-off-financial-system-supply-chain-cross-contagion-a-study-in-global-systemic-collapse/ http://www.feasta.org/2012/06/17/trade-off-financial-system-...
- nickpsecurity 9y ago
  I totally agree. I think the root of the disagreement is subjective word "scariest." Apparently, a nuclear disaster happening in a random place is the scariest thing for the rest of you. For me and possibly majority of Americans, the scariest thing is what might happen to us. Especially if the odds are high with us seeing reminders in the media. Rogue, nuclear weapon doesn't scare me. Increasingly automated cars, unpatched cellphones, legal ID's hard go fix when stolen, or bank/medical/government/databases compromised all worry me more since they can impact me and happen a lot. SCADA, too, if non-nuclear given it might be my power plant or utility.
  - dredmorbius 9y ago
    Hint: it wasn't nuclear. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam Though I also make the argument that the book hasn't been closed on our nuclear disasters, and won't be. For tens of thousands of years. Banqiao, however, has been fully resolved. (It occurred in 1975.)
koide 9y ago
I believe the parent meant that cyberweapons can be used to launch nuclear weapons without authorization. Which I'm not sure is actually feasible...

rl3 9y ago

>Cyber weapons mean that during a crisis, nuclear militaries have to consider whether their chain of command has been compromised. Good luck compromising nuclear arms C&C. There's a reason a lot of it runs on systems from the 70s.

qb45 9y ago
Maybe in the US and Russia. I wonder if it could be pirated Windows XP in North Korea, OTOH ;)
- ben_w 9y ago
  Well, the UK has what is pejoratively called "Windows for Warships: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_Command_System#SMCS-NG_as_first_deployment_of_.22Windows_for_Warships.22 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_Command_System#SMC...
  - qb45 9y ago
    Reminds me of this classic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Yorktown_%28CG-48%29#Smart_ship_testbed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Yorktown_%28CG-48%29#Smart... On 21 September 1997, while on maneuvers off the coast of Cape Charles, Virginia, a crew member entered a zero into a database field causing an attempted division by zero in the ship's Remote Data Base Manager, resulting in a buffer overflow which brought down all the machines on the network, causing the ship's propulsion system to fail.