US accused of hypocrisy over cyber warfare
A state that sins more than its sinned against
Recent warnings of a "cyber–Pearl Harbor" by US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and others are hypocritical, according to a leading security expert, given that the US is responsible for most of the online attacks so far uncovered.
"If we look for offensive cyber attacks that have been linked back to a known government, we mostly find attacks that have been launched by United States, not against them," said F-Secure's chief research officer Mikko Hyppönen in a blistering blog post.
"As United States is doing offensive cyber attacks against other countries, certainly other countries feel that they are free to do the same," he writes. "Unfortunately the United States has the most to lose from attacks like these."
So far security researchers have identified five malware attacks that stem from Operation Olympic Games, a collaborative effort between the US and Israel to use malware offensively. The US government hasn't denied the attacks are its work, Hyppönen notes, just launched an investigation to find out who leaked news of the program.
There's very little incentive for a crushing attack against the internet, Hyppönen points out. Online criminals aren't going to bork the net, since it's their livelihood, while activists such as Anonymous have no motive either, since their power derives from being online. Other nation states would be better off using the internet for espionage rather than crashing the entire system, he notes.
Security experts are sharply split on the use of online weaponry to attack physical infrastructure. Some feel it's a better option than putting humans in the line of fire, but many feel it sets a dangerous precedent. Hyppönen clearly counts himself in the latter camp. ®
Regcast training : Hyper-V 3.0, VM high availability and disaster recovery
COMMENTS
US accused of hypocrisy? Really?
The US is the biggest hypocrite in the world.
It mounts InterNet attacks yet claims it is being attacked; it attacks other countries and enters their territories without permission - exactly what terrorists do. It decries dictatorships and loss of democracy and yet it copies them with respect to US citizens.
It even objects to countries locking people up without trial and yet it has hundreds of it's own.
Hopefully someone will call the loan notes and then they will be trouble.
"The idea is to protect one's water supply, power infrastructure, banking systems.....if that requires some "attacking" probes to forestall a major effort on the part of the "mis-understanders of Islam", then so be it."
I'm stumped as to how attacks on Iran's installations with things like Stuxnet, help protect US water supplies, etc. All they seem to do to me is stoke up motivation for revenge attacks and legitimize attacks on infrastructure.
Re: More from the department of the bleedin' obvious
Ohh lordy, we have a coloured person in the White House. That makes 6 decades of bloody, asymmetric warfare alright then!
"Try not to be a racist in the future"
What's this, a new variation of the "antisemite" card? ODFO! Get back to me when drones are bombing the Hamptons.
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
What you need to know about cloud backup
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Top 10 SIEM Implementer’s Checklist
Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner
