Re: [iwar] The assumption of MAD


From: Fred Cohen
From: fc@all.net
To: iwar@egroups.com

Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:10:59 -0700 (PDT)


fc  Tue Oct 24 16:14:17 2000
Received: from 207.222.214.225
	by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0)
	for fc@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:14:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by multi33.netcomi.com for fc
 (with Netcom Interactive pop3d (v1.21.1 1998/05/07) Tue Oct 24 23:14:11 2000)
X-From_: sentto-279987-694-972429207-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com  Tue Oct 24 18:13:24 2000
Received: from ci.egroups.com (ci.egroups.com [208.50.99.231]) by multi33.netcomi.com (8.8.5/8.7.4) with SMTP id SAA21711 for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 18:13:24 -0500
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-694-972429207-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.10.38] by ci.egroups.com with NNFMP; 24 Oct 2000 23:13:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 30197 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2000 23:11:47 -0000
X-Sender: fc@all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@egroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-6_1_0); 24 Oct 2000 23:11:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 25863 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2000 23:11:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 24 Oct 2000 23:11:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO all.net) (24.1.84.100) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Oct 2000 23:11:00 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by all.net (8.9.3/8.7.3) id QAA08670 for iwar@egroups.com; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:10:59 -0700
Message-Id: <200010242310.QAA08670@all.net>
To: iwar@egroups.com
In-Reply-To:  from "Dan Ellis" at Oct 24, 2000 02:40:02 PM
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1]
From: Fred Cohen 
X-eGroups-Approved-By: fc@all.net via email; 24 Oct 2000 23:11:47 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list iwar@egroups.com; contact iwar-owner@egroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@egroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: 
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:10:59 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [iwar] The assumption of MAD
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

First - probabilities:

Probability is defined over the range [0-1] (inclusive) it is a real
number with no units.  The notion of probability as a function of time
is based on the notions behind random stochastic processes - repeated
events with 'random' selection as their basis.  While weather doesn't
really fit this, we tend to use randomness when we don't have a better
model of cause and effect (or when it is at the subatomic level).

Next - information in the national interest:

Freedom of information - as a broad concept - is not only in the
national interest of the US, it is writen into the Constitution (Bill of
Rights at least).  But this doesn't mean you are allowed to scream fire
in a crowded theater when there is no fire and it does not mean that the
US must be without secrets. 

Per the message sent by Dan Ellis:

> 	What happens to your (probability) model when somebody decides
> that they have nothing to loose by being destroyed?  Both sides of the
> Cold War were more concerned about loosing what they had than simply
> inflicting damage on the enemy.  That was the assumption that had to hold
> true for MAD to be an effective deterent.

For high consequence systems, one of the things you have to include in
the model (if you want to get a reasonable result) is some number of
insiders will collude to make the thing work in the wrong way.

...
> 	How do you quantify the amount of damage a person can do who has
> the following mindset:  "I hate my life.  I want to kill/hurt/mame as many
> people as I can.  I want to die being a witness of hatred.  I want to be
> remembered as the person who did the worst thing ever."  Now, I do NOT

This is why we have multi-person controls, limited scope of authority,
and so forth as preconditions to use of nuclear weapons.  If the US
became unstable, these things would be at higher risk of failure, which
is why stability is so much better than rapid change if preventing
nuclear war is your only priority (not a bad priority actually).

...
> schools)!  They can exist in any population.  And, as soon as you get
> somebody like this with sufficient influence and power, something bad can
> happen.
> 	So, what do you think?  Is there a way to deal with such a world
> view?  How do you account for that in your probability models?

Yes, of course, this is accounted for in the models of probabilities
used in high consequence systems.  But that doesn't make the accounting
right all the time.  This is also why the notion of human reliability
testing is used (even though the Dr.  Strangelove scenario may seem to
some to be the reality, it's pretty far from the truth today - but I
stil enjoy watching the movie).  I am not a big believer in this notion,
but some people probably are...  At any rate, people who do igh
consequence systems tend to be rather careful about their assumptions.

FC

--
	   My PGP keys are available at https://all.net/pgpkeys.html
Fred Cohen at Sandia National Laboratories at tel:925-294-2087 fax:925-294-1225
  Fred Cohen & Associates: http://all.net - fc@all.net - tel/fax:925-454-0171
      Fred Cohen - Practitioner in Residence - The University of New Haven
				Have a great day!!!

[This communication is confidential to the parties to which it is sent. 
If you get this email in error, please delete it immediately and do not
use, repost, reprint, or view the contents.  This message is and all
messages to or from the sender of this message are recorded.  Reading
this message or sending email to its sender constitutes consent for such
recording.  ISPs, governments, and a wide array of other folks gather
and analyze email.  While I have a reasonable expectation of privacy in
my email as in my USPS mail, I may not actually get it in either.]

Per the official policy of Sandia National Laboratories, the reader should be
aware that:
  - Fred Cohen of Fred Cohen & Associates is the same Fred Cohen who is a
    Principal Member of Technical Staff at Sandia National Laboratories.
  - Fred Cohen & Associates - is owned and operated by Fred Cohen and is
    separate and independent from the work done by Fred Cohen at Sandia
    National Laboratories. 

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/14/_/595019/_/972429207/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

------------------
http://all.net/