Cyber Warfare Weapons – Part 2

Last week in Part 1 we tried to define cyber warfare and gave some examples of what has already taken place in the recent past.

In this second part we explore what is happening in the real world of cyber warfare, and what Governments are doing to protect us.

Cyberspace and its Security
What can be done and who should act in defense of a nation’s cyberspace? The answer may be complicated. Defending cyberspace is not an easy feat, considering the number of interconnected computers, mobile devices and networks. The majority of the systems, including those regulating nations’ critical infrastructures, are interconnected and then vulnerable not only to direct attacks but also to infection by transmission. Ironically, the numerous technological advances might also pose a risk, as cyber terrorists seem to be always a step forward in identifying security vulnerabilities before security experts can patch them. Lack of recognized rules in cyberspace and difficulty to implement boundaries complete the picture.

cyberspace1

Lacking a real global response to cyber warfare, many countries and organizations are creating structures and task forces to prepare against cyber threats. According to intelligence studies, more than 140 countries have funded cyber weapon development programs. The U.S. is particularly active and created the USCYBERCOM that “plans, coordinates, integrates, synchronizes, and conducts activities to: direct the operations and defense of specified Department of Defense information networks and; prepare to, and when directed, conduct full-spectrum military cyberspace operations in order to enable actions in all domains, ensure US/Allied freedom of action in cyberspace and deny the same to our adversaries.”

 
In 2012, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) invested $110 million in Plan X, a “Cyberspace is now recognized as a critical domain of operations by the U.S. military and its protection is a national security issue. Plan X is a foundational cyberwarfare program to develop platforms for the Department of Defense to plan for, conduct, and assess cyber warfare in a manner similar to kinetic warfare.” The program was included in DARPA’s reported $1.54 billion cyber budget for 2013-2017.
Recently, the U.S. Naval Academy also received $120M to build a classified cyber warfare center in 2016. The center will allow midshipmen to work on classified system and acquire cyber warfare skills.

 
Organizations like the European Advanced Cyber Defence Centre (ACDC), the NATO Computer Incident Response Capability (NCIRC) and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), amongst many others, are working on fighting back against organized, international cyber criminals that have used cyberspace as a warfighting domain.
However, this may not be enough to avoid terrorism-based cyberwar attacks, so everyone ought to prepare proactively and effectively by securing systems as much as possible. In an Internet-connected world, every end user is at risk, either directly or indirectly. The Internet provides many different ways to attack. Internet-connected systems must be secured on a global scale.

 
With cyberspace being so vast, flexible, and unregulated, all its users are highly vulnerable to dangers from outside threats. Recent cyber attacks highlight the potential threat posed by information warfare tactics and techniques that use computer connectivity and exploit vulnerabilities sometimes caused by users’ inattentiveness or lack of basic cyber security practices.
Proper use of intrusion-detection and intrusion-prevention systems (IDS/IPS) and firewalls (a network’s first line of defense against threats) is a basic response. Through real-time analysis of network traffic—i.e., to investigate and contain these security threats—people can detect the majority of the less sophisticated hacking attacks at a user level.

 
Larger companies must be more aware than ever about their network security vulnerabilities and secure their properties with proper Advanced Threat Protection Platforms for endpoint protection and server security.
In the case of government-orchestrated cyber attacks, one of the main lines of defense is the creation of a common front against attackers. There is no better time than now to open collaboration and dialogue amongst various industries and government agencies to take action. Attacks against larger, interconnected systems might be more easily disclosed by comparing data and creating common task forces. Detection and prevention alone may not be enough to stop the attackers, each time, but at least it may inhibit future, similar threats.
The Internet might be becoming a new weapon for terrorists, so overcoming cyber vulnerability requires multiple different organizations to come forward and stop the launch of cyber threats that can manipulate the physical world while operating without international boundaries.

 

Summary
Some of the numerous larger-scale cyber attacks can be intuitively considered acts of cyber war. With many countries large and small investing in cyber warfare, it is impossible not to think of the use of “information warfare” as a new form of terrorism. Information warfare goes beyond simply attacking computers and communications networks, as a computer-literate terrorist can wreak havoc causing physical destruction and harm to populations. The Internet can be turned into a weapon used against targets by terrorists hidden in cyberspace to carry out cyber violence and disruption, while being physically located elsewhere. Computer-related crimes, as an extension of terrorist attacks, have the potential of bringing catastrophic side effects.

 
Cyberspace is increasingly becoming a place of risk and danger, vulnerable to hacks and cyber warfare. With today’s civilization dependent on interconnected cyber systems to virtually operate many of the critical systems that make our daily lives easier, it is obvious that cyber warfare can be the choice for many governments and states, especially those that don’t have access to expensive, conventional weapons of mass destruction.
So, how do we counteract such attacks? If cyber warfare is considered war, then anti-terrorism defenses must be deployed. First, though, a legal basis for responses to attacks must be defined. A legal definition of cyber war and cyber weapon, a definition agreed upon globally, is necessary to define the perimeters within which nations can operate in cyberspace. It is important to define what to consider cyber espionage, cyber war or an act of simple hacking.

nsa-digital-war

 
Lacking a clear definition and a global cyber etiquette, nations are left with creating their own defense against cyber weapons and cyber espionage. Exploring real-world examples, continuously monitoring the Information Superhighway, and endorsing cyber security awareness, web security and online safety are the tools currently available for an effective international governance of the Internet.
Although the United States has not been subjective to real, destructive cyber terrorism as of today, in terms of hostile action or threat, it has identified a number of ways terrorists can use the computer as a tool for hacking or information warfare. As the job of a cyberterrorist has become more difficult to detect, in time, information control may also be critical for successful counter-terrorism and avoidance of infrastructure warfare. UK and NATO allies of the US are playing their part by increasing spending on cyber soldiers.
Therefore, it is paramount to investigate some common defense mechanisms that can help pinpoint and capture these threats before they affect massive numbers of people and impair activities in a much more pervasive way.

 

 
References
Brecht, D. (2014, December). Are Cyber Threats the New Terrorism Frontier? Cyber Warnings E-Magazine, 28-32. Retrieved from http://www.cyberdefensemagazine.com/newsletters/december-2014/index.html#p=28
Clapper, J. R. (2013, March 12). US Intelligence Community Worldwide Threat Assessment Statement for the Record. Retrieved from http://www.odni.gov/files/documents/Intelligence%20Reports/2013%20ATA%20SFR%20for%20SSCI%2012%20Mar%202013.pdf
Donohue, B. (2014, December 19). FBI Officially Blames North Korea in Sony Hacks. Retrieved from http://threatpost.com/fbi-officially-blames-north-korea-in-sony-hacks/109999
Kostadinov, D. (2012, December 21). Cyberterrorism Defined (as distinct from “Cybercrime”). Retrieved from http://resources.infosecinstitute.com/cyberterrorism-distinct-from-cybercrime/
Morello, C. (2014, November 16). State Department shuts down its e-mail system amid concerns about hacking. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/state-department-shuts-down-its-e-mail-system-amid-concerns-about-hacking/2014/11/16/92cf0722-4815-41ca-b602-9bfe8ecdb256_story.html
NATO REVIEW. (n.d.). The history of cyber attacks – a timeline. Retrieved from http://www.nato.int/docu/review/2013/cyber/timeline/EN/index.htm
Paganini, P. (2013, December 6). Cyber warfare – Why we need to define a model of conflict? Retrieved from http://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/20204/intelligence/cyber-warfare-model-of-conflict.html
Storm, D. (2014, December 22). Cyberwarfare: Digital weapons causing physical damage. Retrieved from http://www.computerworld.com/article/2861531/cyberwarfare-digital-weapons-causing-physical-damage.html
Suciu, P. (2014, December 21). Why cyber warfare is so attractive to small nations. Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2014/12/21/why-cyber-warfare-is-so-attractive-to-small-nations/
InfoSec Institute

Advertisements

One thought on “Cyber Warfare Weapons – Part 2

  1. Pingback: Cyber Warfare Weapons – Part 1 | Arcadeus OPS

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s