5 ms·

Just in the unlikely event of disarmament negotiations between cyber super powers in the future. You can count nukes and explosive power, but you can't count cy

Just in the unlikely event of disarmament negotiations between cyber super powers in the future. You can count nukes and explosive power, but you can't count cyber weapons. A new deterrence doctrine,nobody knows what will happen.

Enginerrrd 5y ago
It's not totally unprecedented. It's hard to count HUMINT assets too, and yet it is the subject of negotiations. Biological weapons have been similar and are perhaps most analogous. Though, you can offer tours of your facilities and it's harder to hide large fermenters and the like. But it's much harder to identify offensive weapons research than it is offensive production.
jason-phillips 5y ago
> A new deterrence doctrine, nobody knows what will happen. I'm quoting someone else's apropos statement here: "You don't just turn a country's electric grid back on."
3pt14159 5y ago
It has already evolved. I don't want to rehash everything here, but I wrote something that made the rounds at the Munich security conference some years back and the bottom line is deterrence to massive cyberattack is via nuclear weapons. Do you like Moscow? Ok great. Keep the lights on stateside. That's the policy. I know it isn't what HN likes to hear but it's not like it doesn't exist. There is a reason the nuclear football has a switch to disable the internet for at least the USA and probably Canada too because of NORAD, etc. Even Matt Tait (aka, pwnallthethings) has talked about the "strategic threats" from the cyber domain of war at a completely unclassified conference in Miami and he ended the talk with a mushroom cloud up. I believe it was the keynote, but I can't quite remember.
- jmnicolas 5y ago
  FWIW I tried to visit the website linked in your description but your certificate is invalid since November.
- throwoutway 5y ago
  Where is the source for the switch in the nuclear football to turn off the internet? I remember Obama wanted that option, but there was significant pushback and I thought the idea died on its own. What happened?
  - s5300 5y ago
    I am also after this info. I believe the parent poster given his high reputation, I just hope he can point us to some sort of article about it as google is failing me
- Borrible 5y ago
  I like the idea of adding rather vague threats, compared to kinetic weapons, with often not clearly or quickly identifiable causers/perpetrators as a possible justification for a nuclear weapon use. Increases the fun and excitement. Should become a "launch on warning" criterion.
jmnicolas 5y ago
Can't you just hide nukes or do they emit some radiations that are visible through satellites?
- Borrible 5y ago
  >Can't you just hide nukes... The Russians say so. https://www.newsweek.com/russia-us-hiding-nuclear-weapons-1362134 https://www.newsweek.com/russia-us-hiding-nuclear-weapons-13...
  - jmnicolas 5y ago
    The article refers to "clever accounting tricks" but doesn't say if a nuke that was never registered anywhere is detectable.
- mcguire 5y ago
  It's not terribly difficult to hide nuclear warheads themselves. Their launch systems, however, require a significant amount of infrastructure that is usually easily visible. As is the infrastructure for building the warheads.

Enginerrrd 5y ago

It's not totally unprecedented. It's hard to count HUMINT assets too, and yet it is the subject of negotiations. Biological weapons have been similar and are perhaps most analogous. Though, you can offer tours of your facilities and it's harder to hide large fermenters and the like. But it's much harder to identify offensive weapons research than it is offensive production.

jason-phillips 5y ago

> A new deterrence doctrine, nobody knows what will happen. I'm quoting someone else's apropos statement here: "You don't just turn a country's electric grid back on."

3pt14159 5y ago

It has already evolved. I don't want to rehash everything here, but I wrote something that made the rounds at the Munich security conference some years back and the bottom line is deterrence to massive cyberattack is via nuclear weapons. Do you like Moscow? Ok great. Keep the lights on stateside. That's the policy. I know it isn't what HN likes to hear but it's not like it doesn't exist. There is a reason the nuclear football has a switch to disable the internet for at least the USA and probably Canada too because of NORAD, etc. Even Matt Tait (aka, pwnallthethings) has talked about the "strategic threats" from the cyber domain of war at a completely unclassified conference in Miami and he ended the talk with a mushroom cloud up. I believe it was the keynote, but I can't quite remember.

jmnicolas 5y ago
FWIW I tried to visit the website linked in your description but your certificate is invalid since November.
throwoutway 5y ago
Where is the source for the switch in the nuclear football to turn off the internet? I remember Obama wanted that option, but there was significant pushback and I thought the idea died on its own. What happened?
- s5300 5y ago
  I am also after this info. I believe the parent poster given his high reputation, I just hope he can point us to some sort of article about it as google is failing me
Borrible 5y ago
I like the idea of adding rather vague threats, compared to kinetic weapons, with often not clearly or quickly identifiable causers/perpetrators as a possible justification for a nuclear weapon use. Increases the fun and excitement. Should become a "launch on warning" criterion.

jmnicolas 5y ago

Can't you just hide nukes or do they emit some radiations that are visible through satellites?

Borrible 5y ago
>Can't you just hide nukes... The Russians say so. https://www.newsweek.com/russia-us-hiding-nuclear-weapons-1362134 https://www.newsweek.com/russia-us-hiding-nuclear-weapons-13...
- jmnicolas 5y ago
  The article refers to "clever accounting tricks" but doesn't say if a nuke that was never registered anywhere is detectable.
mcguire 5y ago
It's not terribly difficult to hide nuclear warheads themselves. Their launch systems, however, require a significant amount of infrastructure that is usually easily visible. As is the infrastructure for building the warheads.