3 ms·

The first link is to a DOD report. What part of..well, anything, suggests the US isn't taking cyber seriously?

• ckozlowski 13y ago
  That a unified (sub)-combatant-level command has been newly created for this very task speaks volumes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Cyber_Command http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Cyber_Command The author's frustration is justified, but his conclusion that they do not take it seriously is misplaced. In my opinion, the U.S. (and specifically, DoD in this case) suffers from two things: 1. Defense is hard. Once a vulnerability in a system has been found, defense is reactive. It is currently very hard to protect against a determined attacker. 2. DoD is a large ship, and while they have identified the need for an intense focus in this area; building the skillset and practices to make this work effectively in such a large institution is hard. To summarize, the author is right to be frustrated but the examples he lists come from a lack of effectiveness, not a lack of focus. It is worth putting into context that the defenses of other nations (and private entities) are not much better, and often worse. Offence is much, much more powerful than defense in the world of InfoSec currently. This is an issue that all nations are dealing with. I am reminded of a line I read on a popular security research's blog shortly after the Mandant report came out: "The #1 APT (Advanced Persistent Threat) actor in the world today is...the United States."