The key point: In the world of defending military networks, it takes fighters - not merely techies - to do the job. All that means is you need someone with do

The key point: In the world of defending military networks, it takes fighters - not merely techies - to do the job. All that means is you need someone with domain knowledge. You need someone who can recognize non-technical signs of infiltration, who knows the value of different targets, and who knows the consequences of a particular system being compromised at a particular time. For military work, that means "fighters." The military's mistake, if indeed they're making this mistake, is taking it for granted that the best way to create good leaders and decision-makers is to train military guys in computer security, when they really need to open it up from both sides. Anybody who writes software in business knows that the really effective people who understand the technical and domain ends well enough to coordinate them emerge from both sides of the business, not just from the technical side and not just from the domain side. P.S. I would be most alarmed by the small size of the Cyber Command, but I assume it's misinformation.