Printable Version
War in Cyberspace: The Digital Front
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
The Center for
National Policy (CNP) was privileged to host
both Colonel
Felipe Morales Jr. of the U.S. Air Force
and Dan
Verton, Founder and Executive Producer
of Homeland Security Television at a lunchtime
discussion focused on U.S. vulnerabilities and
strategies in cyberspace. As Deputy
Director of Cyber Operations, Colonel Morales
provided insight as to how the Air Force is
meeting this challenge, while Mr. Verton gave
an overall assessment of the threat level that
our cyber infrastructure faces.
Colonel Morales argued that to counteract an intrusion or attack in the cyber domain, the fight must be made in and through cyberspace itself. Cyberspace is not a physical combat zone where troops can be sent and requires its own significantly different strategy. It is a remote front that must be assessed daily as it constantly evolves into a larger and more complex battlefield. Colonel Morales also commented on Air Force Cyber Command (AFCYBER) and how it will serve as a major tool in fighting cyber attacks.
Mr. Verton continued the discussion by giving his thoughts on the types of attacks we experience and what he foresees in the future. Thus far, the United States has found itself a victim of strategic cyber attacks that target various areas of Chinese interest. However, he argues that we will not see a major cyber attack made on the U.S. by China in the near future. A major attack could lead to our systems being shut down and taken offline. As a result, China or any other intruder would lose a source where information was once obtainable.
From the discussion, it became clear that there is no international legal framework in place when dealing with hackers and other cyber-terrorists. With this absence, drawing a line between rogue and government hackers has yet to be done and leaves us with a vital question to ask: is there really a distinction between rogue and government hackers? Mr. Verton argued that there is no such thing as a rogue hacker in China. Such activity done by any individual in China is done so for the sole purpose of obtaining information for their government. Colonel Morales asked the question that at what level of destruction or disruption will we declare a cyber attack an act of war, and at what caliber will the military respond?
In conclusion, it is evident that there is a lot of progress that needs to be made by the U.S. in cyberspace. This will hopefully come easily as the AFCYBER merges from the provisional stage to fully operational. With it, we will gain a better understanding to the previous questions and develop policies to guide authorities when fighting cyber attacks. A cyber breach must be dealt with in a fast and effective fashion before results become too costly and possibly catastrophic.
Colonel Morales argued that to counteract an intrusion or attack in the cyber domain, the fight must be made in and through cyberspace itself. Cyberspace is not a physical combat zone where troops can be sent and requires its own significantly different strategy. It is a remote front that must be assessed daily as it constantly evolves into a larger and more complex battlefield. Colonel Morales also commented on Air Force Cyber Command (AFCYBER) and how it will serve as a major tool in fighting cyber attacks.
Mr. Verton continued the discussion by giving his thoughts on the types of attacks we experience and what he foresees in the future. Thus far, the United States has found itself a victim of strategic cyber attacks that target various areas of Chinese interest. However, he argues that we will not see a major cyber attack made on the U.S. by China in the near future. A major attack could lead to our systems being shut down and taken offline. As a result, China or any other intruder would lose a source where information was once obtainable.
From the discussion, it became clear that there is no international legal framework in place when dealing with hackers and other cyber-terrorists. With this absence, drawing a line between rogue and government hackers has yet to be done and leaves us with a vital question to ask: is there really a distinction between rogue and government hackers? Mr. Verton argued that there is no such thing as a rogue hacker in China. Such activity done by any individual in China is done so for the sole purpose of obtaining information for their government. Colonel Morales asked the question that at what level of destruction or disruption will we declare a cyber attack an act of war, and at what caliber will the military respond?
In conclusion, it is evident that there is a lot of progress that needs to be made by the U.S. in cyberspace. This will hopefully come easily as the AFCYBER merges from the provisional stage to fully operational. With it, we will gain a better understanding to the previous questions and develop policies to guide authorities when fighting cyber attacks. A cyber breach must be dealt with in a fast and effective fashion before results become too costly and possibly catastrophic.