4 ms·

What I've taken away from the last few years of watching large companies deal with bad actors is that cyberwarfare is here. The public is yet unaware that we te

What I've taken away from the last few years of watching large companies deal with bad actors is that cyberwarfare is here. The public is yet unaware that we technologists have become front line soldiers battling against nation state actors and brigands, and not just for their child's birthday address. I've listened to plenty of OWASP/Black Hat talks about critical pieces of infrastructure ("air gaped" power grids for example) hacked by red teams. This is scary stuff. We all need to start treating this like the hidden war it is and start planning for the worst. Cyberware is no longer the warfare of the future it is the now.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
scoggs 8y ago
I definitely agree. I'm very worried about the potential for a World War 3 scenario where not only has the warfare technology in combat, the weaponry and ammunition, the missiles and bombs and such becoming more precision and deadly components of war but beyond that the parties involved have the added digital technology, imaging technology, unmanned aircraft vehicle technology, and all the rest of the warfare-related tech that's cropped up over the last decade plus added to their arsenal. In an all out war scenario we don't really know the extent this new technology will ultimately play. Is it going to be the type of scenario like the first two World Wars where rifling, tank, and air combat technology is going to be one of the deciding factors? Is it going to be something more akin to World War 2 where Alan Turing's work on deciphering of the Enigma Machines / Nazi's communication codes is going to play an integral role in preparation, troop movement decisions, and gaining the edge on the enemy? I get the feeling, personally, that it's going to be a combination of everything above and more. Those individual military's capability of incorporating all of the tech at their fingertips and applying the knowledge / inferences gleaned while also making the best use of their cyber, hard, and soft military tactics is going to be a major deciding factor since the war will probably be staged on many fronts (physical and digital) between many allied nations versus many other allied nations. The ability to communicate and execute will be as important as it always was (e.g. maximum importance, as usual) and I strongly feel that history will reveal the more technologically advanced and more wisely dependent nations of those technologies will write history as they become the winning nation(s) / powers.
- ilovecaching 8y ago
  Fixed
  - scoggs 8y ago
    Thank ya! I edited my comment as well to be more involved in the conversation, since my comment asking you about the spelling is a moot point.
Gokenstein 8y ago
In the US the general public, engineers who discover and are tasked with preventing these attacks, and to a large extent the companies that are attacked are faced with a perverse set of incentives at the moment. Notifying federal authorities is often the best/only recourse. This results in a long waiting period where they determine the geo political or national interest in these attacks and they may make recommendations on how to best navigate and mitigate the impact but there is 0 incentive to make the fact that an attack occurred public knowledge. How would you propose we shine a light on what bad actors, companies and individuals who are attacked, and even our own federal law enforcement would rather keep secret? How do we give law enforcement the ability to trace these attacks to their proper source during an ongoing investigation, but keep them accountable?
- the_duke 8y ago
  With GDPR, you actually MUST inform government institutions within 48 hours when personal information is leaked. The penalty are potentially very hefty fines. (up to 2% of annual revenue, IIRC)
  - Gokenstein 8y ago
    It is oddly silent on what government institutions MUST do within 48 hours...

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

scoggs 8y ago

I definitely agree. I'm very worried about the potential for a World War 3 scenario where not only has the warfare technology in combat, the weaponry and ammunition, the missiles and bombs and such becoming more precision and deadly components of war but beyond that the parties involved have the added digital technology, imaging technology, unmanned aircraft vehicle technology, and all the rest of the warfare-related tech that's cropped up over the last decade plus added to their arsenal. In an all out war scenario we don't really know the extent this new technology will ultimately play. Is it going to be the type of scenario like the first two World Wars where rifling, tank, and air combat technology is going to be one of the deciding factors? Is it going to be something more akin to World War 2 where Alan Turing's work on deciphering of the Enigma Machines / Nazi's communication codes is going to play an integral role in preparation, troop movement decisions, and gaining the edge on the enemy? I get the feeling, personally, that it's going to be a combination of everything above and more. Those individual military's capability of incorporating all of the tech at their fingertips and applying the knowledge / inferences gleaned while also making the best use of their cyber, hard, and soft military tactics is going to be a major deciding factor since the war will probably be staged on many fronts (physical and digital) between many allied nations versus many other allied nations. The ability to communicate and execute will be as important as it always was (e.g. maximum importance, as usual) and I strongly feel that history will reveal the more technologically advanced and more wisely dependent nations of those technologies will write history as they become the winning nation(s) / powers.

ilovecaching 8y ago
Fixed
- scoggs 8y ago
  Thank ya! I edited my comment as well to be more involved in the conversation, since my comment asking you about the spelling is a moot point.

Gokenstein 8y ago

In the US the general public, engineers who discover and are tasked with preventing these attacks, and to a large extent the companies that are attacked are faced with a perverse set of incentives at the moment. Notifying federal authorities is often the best/only recourse. This results in a long waiting period where they determine the geo political or national interest in these attacks and they may make recommendations on how to best navigate and mitigate the impact but there is 0 incentive to make the fact that an attack occurred public knowledge. How would you propose we shine a light on what bad actors, companies and individuals who are attacked, and even our own federal law enforcement would rather keep secret? How do we give law enforcement the ability to trace these attacks to their proper source during an ongoing investigation, but keep them accountable?

the_duke 8y ago
With GDPR, you actually MUST inform government institutions within 48 hours when personal information is leaked. The penalty are potentially very hefty fines. (up to 2% of annual revenue, IIRC)
- Gokenstein 8y ago
  It is oddly silent on what government institutions MUST do within 48 hours...