IT-Analysis.com
IT-Analysis.com Logo
Business Issues
Enterprise SME Business Issues Technology Services Channels
Module Header
Philip HowardBloor IM Blog
Philip Howard
8th February - Bribery
Nigel StanleyBloor Security Blog
Nigel Stanley
8th February - Conficker grounds police checks
David NorfolkThe Norfolk Punt
David Norfolk
3rd February - What's wrong with "security"
Laurie McCabeLaurie McCabe
Laurie McCabe
2nd February - What is Total Cost of Ownership, and Why Should You Care?
Philip HowardBloor IM Blog
Philip Howard
2nd February - Calpont finally comes to market
Module Header
Q. What features do you want to see on this site?
 
Analysis
"Cyber warfare rules"
Bob McDowall By: Bob McDowall, , IE4C
Published: 13th February 2003
Copyright IE4C © 2003
Logo for IE4C

Though busy with preparation for other forms of warfare, President George W. Bush appears to have found time to ask officials and members of his administration to draw up rules of engagement to govern cyber warfare.

This would encompass protocols and rules governing the way in which military hackers use computers to attack the full range of the enemy's technology. Enemy technology functions may cover a host of things from military and civilian communications networks to computer systems controlling transport and utility functions, or financial and taxation gathering functions.

Apparently, according to the Washington Post, the presidential directive seeks to formalise rules for the use of cyber warfare, similar to those that exists for nuclear engagement.

The USA is, of course, one of a handful of nation states to have developed a Cyber warfare unit as a prelude to the time when nations may be brought to defeat and surrender by attacks over computer networks and the internet. It seems that American cyber operations are currently governed by some basic rules, which seek to avoid disproportionate or indiscriminate attacks, which disregard civilian casualties. Thus, a computer attack on a railway signalling system - thereby increasing the prospect of accidents and collisions is not acceptable, while bombing the signalling for military advantage is considered acceptable under current engagement rules.

The notion of cyber warfare rules similar to Geneva Convention Rules is somewhat mind boggling. Who is going to endorse and ratify them? Are those, who stray beyond the rules of cyber warfare likely to be put on trail for war crimes? Perhaps more unsettling is the prospect of retaliatory cyber counter attacks?

The USA has a higher level of automation governing civilian functions both in the public and private sectors as well, as military functions. As such it is more vulnerable than most other nation states to cyber warfare.

A study by the US congress some five years ago suggested that the Pentagon computer systems were subject to nearly a quarter of a million attacks each year by hackers. More than half of these entered the networks, albeit those containing unclassified, if sensitive information.

The future looks disconcerting to say the least!

Reader Comments

Sorry, we are no longer accepting comments on this item. We suggest trying to contact the author directly.

Advertisement



Published by: IT Analysis Communications Ltd.
T: +44 (0)190 888 0760 | F: +44 (0)190 888 0761
Email: