Excerpt: "The Pentagon released a long-promised cybersecurity plan Thursday that declares the Internet a domain of war.... The Defense Department's first-ever plan for cyberspace calls on the department to expand its ability to thwart attacks from other nations and groups, beef up its cyber-workforce and expand collaboration with the private sector."
Cyber warfare. (photo: ACUS)
Pentagon Declares the Internet a War Domain
14 July 11
�
he Pentagon released a long-promised cybersecurity plan Thursday that declares the Internet a domain of war.
The plan notably does not spell out how the US military would use the Web for offensive strikes, however.
The Defense Department's first-ever plan for cyberspace calls on the department to expand its ability to thwart attacks from other nations and groups, beef up its cyber-workforce and expand collaboration with the private sector.
Like major corporations and the rest of the federal government, the military "depends on cyberspace to function," the DoD plan says. The US military uses cyberspace for everything from carrying out military operations to sharing intelligence data internally to managing personnel.
"The department and the nation have vulnerabilities in cyberspace," the document states. "Our reliance on cyberspace stands in stark contrast to the inadequacy of our cybersecurity."
Other nations "are working to exploit DoD unclassified and classified networks, and some foreign intelligence organizations have already acquired the capacity to disrupt elements of DoD's information infrastructure," the plan states. "Moreover, non-state actors increasingly threaten to penetrate and disrupt DoD networks and systems."
Groups are capable of this largely because "small-scale technologies" that have "an impact disproportionate to their size" are relatively inexpensive and readily available.
The Pentagon plans to focus heavily on three areas under the new strategy: the theft or exploitation of data; attempts to deny or disrupt access to US military networks; and attempts to "destroy or degrade networks or connected systems."
One problem highlighted in the strategy is a baked-in threat: "The majority of information technology products used in the United States are manufactured and assembled overseas."
DoD laid out a multi-pronged approach to address those issues.
As foreshadowed by Pentagon officials' comments in recent years, the plan etches in stone that cyberspace is now an "operational domain" for the military, just as land, air, sea and space have been for decades.
"This allows DoD to organize, train and equip for cyberspace" as in those other areas, the plan states. It also notes the 2010 establishment of US Cyber Command to oversee all DoD work in the cyber-realm.
The second leg of the plan is to employ new defensive ways of operating in cyberspace, first by enhancing the DoD's "cyber hygiene." That term covers ensuring that data on military networks remains secure, using the Internet wisely and designing systems and networks to guard against cyberstrikes.
The military will continue its "active cyber defense" approach of "using sensors, software, and intelligence to detect and stop malicious activity before it can affect DoD networks and systems." It also will look for new "approaches and paradigms" that will include "development and integration � of mobile media and secure cloud computing."
The plan underscores efforts long under way at the Pentagon to work with other government agencies and the private sector. It also says the Pentagon will continue strong cyber R&D spending, even in a time of declining national security budgets.
Notably, the plan calls the Department of Homeland Security the lead for "interagency efforts to identify and mitigate cyber vulnerabilities in the nation's critical infrastructure." Some experts have warned against DoD overstepping on domestic cyber-matters.
The Pentagon also announced a new pilot program with industry designed to encourage companies to "voluntarily [opt] into increased sharing of information about malicious or unauthorized cyber activity."
The strategy calls for a larger DoD cyber-workforce.
One challenge, Pentagon experts say, will be attracting top IT talent because the private sector can pay much larger salaries � especially in times of shrinking Defense budgets. To that end, "DoD will focus on the establishment of dynamic programs to attract talent early," the plan states.
On IT acquisition, the plan lays out several changes, including faster delivery of systems; moving to incremental development and upgrading instead of waiting to buy "large, complex systems"; and improved security measures.
Finally, the strategy states an intention to work more closely with "small- and medium-sized business" and "entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley and other US technology innovation hubs."
The reaction from Capitol Hill in the immediate wake of the plan's unveiling was mostly muted. Cybersecurity is not a polarizing political issue in the way some defense issues are, like missile defense.
Claude Chafin, a spokesman for House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.), called the strategy "the next step in an important national conversation on securing critical systems and information, one that the Armed Services Committee has been having for some time."
That panel already has set up its own cybersecurity task force, which Chafin said would "consider this [DOD] plan in its sweeping review of America's ability to defend against cyber attacks."
As the Pentagon tweaks its approaches to cybersecurity, Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Wednesday wrote Senate leaders saying that chamber must as well. McCain asked Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to establish a temporary Select Committee on Cyber Security and Electronic Intelligence Leaks.
"Cybersecurity proposals have been put forth by numerous Senate committees, the White House and various government agencies; however, the Senate has yet to coalesce around one comprehensive proposal that adequately addresses the government-wide threats we face," McCain's office said in a statement. "A select committee would be capable of drafting comprehensive cybersecurity legislation quickly without needing to work through numerous and in some cases competing committees of jurisdiction."
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
John Boanerges pain in the ass Redman
This droning, people and Mother Earth destroying country of ours is exceptional in only one way - our need to maintain greed and total power over all. With both the first prime minister in the U.K., Sir Robert Walpole, and a Dem. Pres., Andrew Jackson, hanging in both my family trees, I, today sadly proclaim:
ASHAMED TO BE AN AMERCAN !!!
I thought Mitt Romney brought Obamacare into the world.
I see ..... so anyone who is not with you is against you ..... seems I've heard that before.
Therefore, Obama is carrying on with an agenda set long ago. He was going to do it regardless and began it all his first day in office. He is definitely liable, but yes, "this crap has been around much longer than he has".
Well, I bet she doesn't know how to get the most out of her iPhone !
Take THAT, 3rd world!
I appreciate the fact that you are joking, of course, and I gotta say I'm not certain that *I'd* take that bet ! A 16-yr-old as brilliant as this one - who has now been living in England for two years ago, not able to "spank" her own i-phone ? I dunno ! ;-))
This young lady is astonishing. She addressed the United Nations a short while back.
Damn ! When I was 16-yrs.-old, I had to struggle to get up and address my High School speech class, and they all spoke my native language. I am likewise certain that I would have "choked" in addressing POTUS at that age
Malala is still years away from being in possession of an adult judgement center (prefrontal cortex engaged) which arrives, for the human female as late as age 22, and for the male, as late as age 24. This is the brain center for higher reasoning.
So given what this incredible person is accomplishing so far - I would just advise the world - Watch Out ! ;-))
I was right behind Jon Stewart when he interviewed Malala on his show and commented " .... I know your Dad is here with you, back in the Green Room ..... but can I adopt you ?"
My only concern for Malala is her choice as a role model, of the beautiful and highly intelligent Benazir Bhutto, former Prime Minister of Pakistan, whose star burned brightly until she herself was assassinated.
Thanks, man.
Of course. That's their purpose. To keep conflict going. That's what sells more weapons and weapons systems.
Seriously, "Satan worshippers"?
I know hyperbole is fun, but just because you're not a Muslim doesn't give you the right to say 1 billion people are "Satan worshippers".
Lying and bearing false witness are both against the Ten Commandments.
Great post, and I'm certain you meant to note that Malala is from Pakistan, rather than India. She speaks Urdu as a native.
Malala is right about education, it is the key to freeing people but Obama will continue to use his drones while the rest of the world watches in growing disgust.
Or Elizabeth Warren's secretary of State
Exactly. And this is the important thing in the article. Once again, the multitude of posts is off-track.
I have seen you advance this canard in the past. This time I have opted against letting it pass unanswered.
First, the commenters have no cause to comment on what was *NOT* in the article, (Obama's response) because the absence of info in the article makes comment on it, *by definition* "off-track".
This is true, even though I know that many of us were also curious about that same question.
Second, the fact that the comment string is *not* custom tailored to *your* specific line of thought is NOT evidence that said posts are all "off-track", a position that you have often maintained in the past.
I hate to be the one to break this to you, but the comment section is really *not* all about you. Sorry if that sounds rude.
Humbug. You're absolutely right that I'm an egomaniac if that makes you feel better. But you should continue to feel disengaged for pouncing on something so small. Of course people can discuss anything they want, any time. But when the main subject is more important, they should stick with it, and if they don't they are SCHMUCKS. Or if I don't make myself clear, then "You are trying to be Nero while Rome burns."
So, by that logic, Miss Yousafzai is a "teabagger", I guess...
I don't accept all the glib cynicism in this although it approaches Orwellian intelligence. George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama simply are and were uninformed men and very stupid on the drone point brought up by Malala.
If either Bush or Obama were students of early World War II, they would know that drones did more than anything to galvanize the British people from Winston Churchill and Mrs. Miniver on down.
Drones are horror movie stuff interspersing silence and characteristic sound with a deadly-- now? when? now?-- boom.
As such, they are fodder for paranoia, but in this as in certain other things, if you aren't paranoid you don't know what's going on.
If Obama hadn't spent so much time studying law while Bush studied the torture of horseflies, either of these guys might have taken a psychology course through which he could have begun to approach the emotional maturity of Malala.
Yes, drones create new terrorists. That may be obvious to educated persons but not to these last two presidents, and neither has proved an enlightened and decisive leader on Malala's huge point despite whatever else redeems them.
Well, let me revise that...to whatever partially redeems Barack Obama. But his redeeming traits don't fully compensate for his decisions on war, torture and drones.