Leading article: Vigilance is the only realistic defence in cyber war

Thursday 02 June 2011 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The Ministry of Defence is recruiting hundreds of new cyber specialists, while the Pentagon has decided that an attack on US computer networks from another country may be deemed an act of war, meriting an armed response. Both moves are merely acknowledgement that the internet, once considered a background support system, is now a front line of modern conflict, both commercial and military.

Once the phenomenon was a curiosity, lending itself to a film such as the 1983 Wargames, about a teenage hacker who breaks into a Pentagon supercomputer and almost unleashes World War III. Today, the threat is perhaps less dramatic but more dangerous and complicated. Cyber attacks are pernicious, pervasive, and constant. The past 12 months have seen well-publicised assaults on Google, Sony, and Lockheed Martin, the largest US defence contractor. But a myriad others go unreported.

Cyber attacks have two main purposes: to steal and to disrupt. The former, exemplified by the Lockheed Martin incident, is but a 21st-century version of espionage, the world's second oldest profession. The second, as the Pentagon's new approach underlines, is war by other means. Imagine, for instance, the devastating impact of an invisible cyber bomb that took out the electricity grids of London or the north-east US for any length of time. The problem is how to deal with such attacks.

Retaliation, whether in kind or otherwise, is clearly one response – but against whom?. Consider the 2010 Stuxnet computer worm attack that disrupted Iran's suspected nuclear arms programme: perish the thought that the US and/or Israel had anything to do with it. The source of a cyber attack can be hard to pin down: is it a malicious hacker, a corporate rival, a terrorist group, or a national government? In other words, is it mischief, or is it war?

A better response might be reinforced international co-operation, perhaps an international convention. But given the nature of the cyber-beast, that is akin to trying to corral the wind. The only realistic defence is constant vigilance. Cyber wars are likely to become even more pernicious and pervasive in the future.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in