Mutually Assured Cyberdestruction?

Mutually Assured Cyberdestruction?

www.nytimes.com

IT took years after the United States dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima for the nation to develop a common national understanding of when and how to use a weapon of such magnitude. Not until after the Cuban Missile Crisis, 50 years ago this October, did a consensus emerge that the weapon was too terrible ever to employ again, save as a deterrent and a weapon of last resort.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Something interesting here that far too many people are simply not taking in to account. Every time someone creates an Iran thread and all those world war threads.

The face of modern warfare has changed and it has changed dramatically over the last decade or so.

Clinton had his cruise missiles,Bush ushered in the era of the drones, and now the era of cyber warfare that has been used for years now, but no one fully comprehends of what that means.

Typical warfare as many people think commonly today is "shock and awe" as we saw in Iraq to asymmetric warfare as what we all seen in Aghanistan and other parts of the world for the last decade.

When the nuclear weapon was invented it was too horrible to use and everyone agreed,but now the evolution of technology has unleashed pandora's box.

Cruise missiles seemed to be used sparingly nuclear weapons twice in all of history and enter the drone that has been used and abused ad finitium, and now enter the era of cyber war fare where 1's and 0's are shot at the speed of light and under the watchful eye of the public masses which sets a dangerous precedent.

Enter "Olympic games" a program started under the last administration and continued up to now the "Manhattan Project" for the 21st century.

Given the "success" of the past 3 years history will more or less repeat itself , and it will be used more and more.

The achilles heel of modern society has been our lust for technology and that has created an overvdependence upon it and there will be those who will exploit it where ever and when ever they can.

The future seems a little brighter on the one hand where policy can be implemented with a keystroke and save lives.

Mutually assured destruction because they can not control the technology or the internet, but of course that could explain the rush to control the net.

Cyber warfare and cyber terrorism has just replaced nuclear bombs as the most dangerous techonolgy man has ever created.

But for this reason alone: It can be used anytime they are feeling froggy.


www.nytimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Interwebs Propaganda war is what I call it..


You know, I've seen videos of the Taliban claiming they were winning the propaganda war. Seems like a fair assessment. Read any controversial Youtube video comments section. Dis-info is everywhere and it goes both ways.

reply to post by neo96


When you consider that the internet has now become a sanctuary to militant groups like the Sudan and Afghanistan once did and how engineered viruses like Stuxnet are becoming Revolutions in Military Affairs (RMAs), then the next twenty-first century Wars on Terror will most certainly be fought in cyberspace.

Edit to say ...

At what point will we start hearing about measures to curtail and/or monitor internet use as part of the 'cyber war on terror'? Forget piracy, once an act of terrorism as been committed and the internet deemed instrumental, then we might start seeing some really draconian regulations and policies implemented.

reply to post by LarryLove

At what point will we start hearing about measures to curtail and/or monitor internet use as part of the 'cyber war on terror'? Forget piracy, once an act of terrorism as been committed and the internet deemed instrumental, then we might start seeing some really draconian regulations and policies implemented.

We have already seen the attempts and accomplishments of that with SOPA,ACTA,CISPA and the attempts to give power of the net over to the UN.

Everything they have done so far was to make more laws to for something that was already illegal and all it will take is a "cyber false flag" to impliment total control just like we have see when the creation of the TSA and Homeland Security.

We are already there and that can extend to that most infamous group anonymous while too many think of them as "heroes" most likely a government op to ensure the total takeover.

The power of flame,stuxnet,duku and the things we have not even heard about yet because they are happening as we speak imagine those rewritten to collapse the entire economies of "whoever the bad guy is at the time".

Most people feared nukes and hemp but those are "stone age weapons" analog weapons in a digital age that do nothing but destroy whereas in the digital age click of a mouse and it is back to business.

reply to post by SLAYER69


And the Taliban website has been getting hacked it seems.

Afghan Taliban Website Defaced by Hackers (4/27/2012 article)

This link might be the Taliban site

^^whois info

Reverse Whois:
"shahamat" owns about3 other domains
Email Search:
is associated with about 8 domains
Registrar History:
1 registrar
NS History:
9 changes on 8 unique name servers over 1 year.
IP History:
10 changes on 7 unique IP addresses over 1 years.
Whois History:
113 records have been archived since 2011-04-26 .
Reverse IP:
7 other sites hosted on this server.
Log In or Create a FREE account to start monitoring this domain name

DomainTools for Windows®

Now you can access domain ownership records anytime, anywhere... right from your own desktop! Download Now>

Domain: shahamat-english.com
Status: Protected

DNS:
alemara10.sksatech.com
alemara11.sksatech.com

Created: 2011-04-25 13:16:18
Expires: 2013-04-25 05:16:18
Last Modified: 2011-04-25 13:16:18

Registrant Contact:
shahamat
shahamat - ()
shahamat
kandahar, kandahar, af 23000
P: +937.34343456 F: +0.0

Administrative Contact:
shahamat
shahamat - ()
shahamat
kandahar, kandahar, af 23000
P: +937.34343456 F: +0.0

Technical Contact:
shahamat
shahamat - ()
shahamat
kandahar, kandahar, af 23000
P: +937.34343456 F: +0.0

Billing Contact:
shahamat
shahamat - ()
shahamat
kandahar, kandahar, af 23000
P: +937.34343456 F: +0.0

``search`` "shahamat-english.com/"
whois them guys ?

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by LarryLove

 

Most people feared nukes and hemp but those are "stone age weapons" analog weapons in a digital age that do nothing but destroy whereas in the digital age click of a mouse and it is back to business.

According to an article in Scientific America's 2005 December edition by Luis Miguel Ariza, 'the number of all terrorist Web sites--those advocating or inciting terrorism or political violence--has grown from a dozen in 1997 to almost 4,700 today [2005].' Extrapolate those numbers on seven years, and we can only imagine how interconnected militant organisation are through the internet. Self-radicalization has never been easier.

Mutually Assured Cyberdestruction is based on a very old reasonings. "If I can not have it then no one can" and "If I am going down then I am taking them with me". With reasoning like that then I can see how Mutually Assured Cyberdestruction would play out.

reply to post by neo96


I agree with you completely, if this is the future then surely complete control of the internet is enevitable. Whether you agree with the lack of freedom or not, compared to the destruction of your economy. Spooks watching your every keystroke is a big price to pay, but a necessary one. I guess as long as they dont encroach on our freedom by closing sites like this one down then. I could probably live with it i suppose.

I still cant get my head around the fact that the internet can be controlled and monitored in such a way. Perhaps someone would care to enlighten me. If the internet was created once. Could,nt rougue versions of the internet be created?

reply to post by EncompassAll


I don't think that we should have to pay a price given that financial sectors, and infrastructure sectors should all be on their own "networks" without having public access just like government should be on their own networks.

That right there should not be happening.

A lot of people think of the internet is just one super massive information highway while that is true for the most part there are what i call nodes and supernode's, where all it would take to control the internet would simply to control the supernode's where all traffic is routed through.

A supernode is a distribution hub that small networks access of course there are far more knowledgeable internet experts out there.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by EncompassAll

 

I don't think that we should have to pay a price given that financial sectors, and infrastructure sectors should all be on their own "networks" without having public access just like government should be on their own networks.

That right there should not be happening.

A lot of people think of the internet is just one super massive information highway while that is true for the most part there are what i call nodes and supernode's, where all it would take to control the internet would simply to control the supernode's where all traffic is routed through.

A supernode is a distribution hub that small networks access of course there are far more knowledgeable internet experts out there.

Ahh! right. I intend to research it all a bit more in the future but my head is full of stuff i still havent answered yet. Thats before i even came on this site. I think this site will be the straw that broke the Camels back and i,ll just crack up lol.

Surely if Government and banking systems use seperate networks, then nobody could access them via the internet anyway could they?

Its way over my head at the minute. So excuse me if im asking stupid questions. Im kust trying to learn a thing or two.

reply to post by neo96


Exactly chief, people have meltdowns if they have to wait 2 days to get another phone. They don't realize that 10 years ago, everyone didn't have cell phones, it was more novelty. Now that the masses can be whored out and told what to buy, of course they can't function without it.

I live out in the country so "power" can get turned off very quickly and randonly. When hurricane Hugo came through the carolina's we didn't have power for a considerable time, but damn we made it. When the power came back on, me and my family looked at our "toys" a little differently..

All of these high tech toys even thou nice aren't a necessity. But let's keep it real here folks, your not going to visit Mars in a Boeing 747 either.

The internet is still the wild wild west. Russia and China have the one of the largest, meanest, and toughest gangs. The internet is vital to the American Economy even socially with the pickup of facebook. Imagine what the meltdowns will be like when the ignorant masses can no longer post their life story on facebook.

reply to post by neo96


I think you are being naive here about the anonymity of the Internet.
every post can be traced even if you use tor , there has to be a start IP and end IP address
otherwise the start IP would not Receive the end IPs reply.
Proxies and random seeding like tor only make it harder to reverse trace , but not impossible.
If anyone posts or hacks anything that is dangerous you can be traced

And you haven't even mentioned IPv6, which will ASSIGN IP's to visitors as opposed to giving a static IP. This will make IP attribution much more robust and difficult to spoof. Granted, China already has IPv6 in place and it gives them substantial control over the Internet, although some enterprising hackivists manage to get around it.

As far as nodes, you don't really even have to control them. Simply hijack a BGP (border gateway protocol) and you'll get everybit of traffic for free, and it's is rather hard to find out if someone has done this. Ask the Chinese, they've gotten very good at it lately.

reply to post by neo96


As far as Flame/Stuxnet/Duqu... I wouldn't be surprised if they existed as a sort of sleeper weapon, laying dormant in systems that the US considers a critical node for an adversary. Perhaps they are designed to trigger if certain commands are introduced into the network, either internally (let's say Russia began to fire up their silos), or externally, via an operative at NSA.

Just stuff to consider. Either way, I find a Cyber MAD scenario far better than a nuclear one.

I think it's worth noting here that the firebombing of Tokyo was more destructive than Hiroshima or Nagasaki.