Why cyber warfare isn’t
Mike Hearn
52030

Thank you for tackling this. We have a problem and people who think they understand it, don’t. Unfortunately I’ve spent many years working in IT, public private, and in between. Right at this point I can safely say that I’m not at all sure what is going on. What appears to be happening technically is what is being reported. The use of stolen NSA tools is bad enough. But I’m not sure the players behind this. I’m also not sure what will happen next. And the fact that this is being reported in a way that will keep it as an unfortunate accident scares hell out off me.

You are absolutely correct. This is a type of warfare that destroys traditional warfare by placing it in a virtual world. The tools are not the tools of a vast industrial infrastructure but of intellectual innovation and massive, short term networks that can appear and disappear in hours or even minutes.

States can devote massive resources to this. The NSA is far bigger and consumes far mores resources than people imagine. It is, nevertheless, evenly matched by the impromptu collaborations I mentioned above. And it can be used as traditional warfare. The stuxnet attack on Iran is an example. But that is not what this is really about. It is what the old thinking can understand. They are being completely blindsided by what we are seeing this weekend. They really, really want people to know that.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.