[iwar] [fc:Cyberterrorists.Will.Be.After.You]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2002-02-24 20:47:06


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-4518-1014612426-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 [204.181.12.215] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.7.4) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Sun, 24 Feb 2002 20:48:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 27980 invoked by uid 510); 25 Feb 2002 04:47:04 -0000
Received: from n6.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.56) by all.net with SMTP; 25 Feb 2002 04:47:04 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-4518-1014612426-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com
Received: from [216.115.97.165] by n6.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Feb 2002 04:47:06 -0000
X-Sender: fc@red.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: unknown); 25 Feb 2002 04:47:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 2056 invoked from network); 25 Feb 2002 04:47:05 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m11.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 25 Feb 2002 04:47:05 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO red.all.net) (12.232.72.152) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 25 Feb 2002 04:47:05 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by red.all.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) id g1P4l6x22135 for iwar@onelist.com; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 20:47:06 -0800
Message-Id: <200202250447.g1P4l6x22135@red.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3]
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
X-Yahoo-Profile: fcallnet
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 20:47:06 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [iwar] [fc:Cyberterrorists.Will.Be.After.You]
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Cyberterrorists Will Be After You

Ref:  ZDNet News, 5:30 AM PT, 21 Feb 2002

<a href="http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107-841889.html">http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107-841889.html>

by David Coursey, AnchorDesk

COMMENTARY--During the next few years, heightened security will change the Internet, 
and the office network on which many of you work. In fact, you'll probably see changes 
first at the office as companies try to "harden" their information assets against 
a wide variety of threats. 

Some of these efforts will be successful, some will be laughable, and most will 
tick you off. Many of you will come to see security as getting in the way of convenience. 
Since many companies will be tightening security on a learn-as-you-go basis, you 
and your colleagues will often have a point. 

Here are some things you need to be thinking about as the great network lockdown 
of 2002 gets into full swing.

o  Most companies don't spend as much money on protecting their data as they do 
on coffee for employees. That's according to Richard Clarke, the White House special 
advisor on cybersecurity issues. He told an audience this week at the RSA Security 
Conference that less than 0.0025 percent of corporate revenue is spent on corporate 
information-technology protection. 

o  It's not just the Internet and your company's data networks that aren't secure. 
Experts point out that most of the nation's critical infrastructure--the power grid, 
voice networks, and water supplies--are vulnerable. You'll find computers at the 
heart of all these systems, too. Terrorists have a wide range of technology targets, 
not all of them in cyberspace. 

o  Our adversaries, be they run-of-the-mill hackers or devoted members of terrorist 
cells, have the same training and much the same access to technology as we do. "Our 
future enemies understand our technology at least as well as we do," Clarke said. 


o  Cyberterrorists could launch an attack from anywhere, potentially framing someone 
else for their evildoing. Imagine what would happen if hackers in Iran left a trail 
that seemed to end in Iraq. It's not hard to imagine such a provocation resulting 
in another round of cruise missiles over Baghdad, especially given President Bush's 
recent "axis of evil" declarations, is it? 

o  If a cyberwar erupts, would we necessarily know? Simply crashing a system for 
seemingly natural reasons could cause enough disruption to achieve an enemy's aims. 
On the other hand, a coordinated series of attacks against highly visible targets--such 
as financial systems--could threaten chaos on a near-global scale. 

So what do we do? 

o  Let's avoid the tendency to throw up our hands. Yes, there are so many potential 
targets and means for an enemy to do us harm--information warfare is just a tiny 
part of this catalog--that we can't possibly protect everything. But by making it 
tougher to succeed, we can reduce the number of potential adversaries and, perhaps, 
make their work against us easier to defeat. 

o  The real threat to most businesses are not cyberterrorists. Instead, the more 
likely danger lies in the more mundane hacking attempts made every day over the Internet 
or perhaps internally by unhappy employees. And don't forget: The biggest loss of 
data is still caused by accidents of one kind or another. 

o  We need to spend money. The success of the Internet makes it attractive to what 
Superman called "the forces of evil" in their many forms. Clarke said most companies 
spend so little money on security they "deserve to be hacked." I am not sure anyone 
deserves to be the victim of crime, but his point--we know the threat exists, so 
we have a responsibility to protect ourselves--remains valid. 

o  We should be accepting of the changes that enhanced security is going to bring. 
But we need to be aware that more security doesn't necessarily go hand-in-glove with 
a loss of personal freedom or privacy. Some companies will, however, use security 
concerns as an excuse to gather more information than they need, to the detriment 
of privacy. 

Here's the kicker, though. Despite more emphasis on security in all quarters, we 
may still be steaming straight into harm's way. In fact, I have deep concerns that 
security issues will never be solved. Then again, I can't help but wonder whether 
our anxieties over cyberterrorism are just as overblown as they were over the Cold 
War's missile gap. 

But I'll address this bipolar future more in Friday's column.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Sponsored by VeriSign - The Value of Trust
Pinpoint the right security solution for your company - FREE
Guide from industry leader VeriSign gives you all the facts.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lWSNbC/WdiDAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

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

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2002-12-31 02:15:03 PST