Air Force's most Important BATTLE.in the GWOT

Expect the Air Force to win this one, it is needed.
Salute the effort and concept.

Gerald

.

Related articles by Zemanta

• US Air Force puts Cyber Command into hibernate mode

USA on stand-by for Cyber whipping.

The WWW is protected...

The Air Force is about to suspend its controversial effort to reorganize its forces to "dominate" cyberspace. The provisional, 8,000-man Cyber Command has been ordered to stop all activities, just weeks before it was supposed to be declared operational.

“Transfers of manpower and resources, including activation and reassignment of units, shall be halted,” according to an internal e-mail obtained by Nextgov's Bob Brewin -- and confirmed by Air Force sources. Instead, the Air Force's new leadership -- including incoming Chief of Staff Norton Schwartz -- will be given time to rethink how big the command will be, and what exactly it will do.

The suspension is yet another body blow to a service already reeling from a series of hits in recent months. Nuclear weapons have been mishandled; major contracts -- including one for a fleet of new tanker planes -- have been botched; the Air Force's civilian and military leaders have been ousted by the Secretary of Defense; a top general apparently committed suicide.

"I am surprised, but not that surprised, given the turmoil in the Air Force," cybersecurity specialist (and former Air Force Captain) Richard Bejtlich tells Danger Room. "It makes sense for new leadership to want to pause and evaluate major projects like Cyber Command before moving forward. The Air Force is facing severe challenges right now, so leadership may want to consolidate its resources before expanding the AF cybermission."

But even if everything all was calm at the Air Force, Cyber Command's path was far from clear. At a June conference , the command's emerging leaders couldn't agree on what exactly the new unit would do. Some said the command's mission would be the "protection and defense of the Air Force's command and control abilities." Others argued that the "mission is to control cyberspace both for attacks and defense." (The service even changed its mission statement to read, "As Airmen, it is our calling to dominate Air, Space, and Cyberspace.") Some believed the Cyber Command would only be responsible for computer networks. Others thought it'd be responsbile for every system that had anything to do with the electromagnetic spectrum -- up to and including laser weapons.

Heavy-breathing television ads, hyping the nascent command's abilities and scope, only added to the confusion. And within the military, the command was blasted for being duplicative -- and maybe even a cheap internal power grab. As Brewin notes, "The hard sell may have been the undoing of the Cyber Command, which seemed to be a grab by the Air Force to take the lead role in cyberspace."

Continue reading "Air Force Suspends Controversial Cyber Command" »

Permalink

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



USA on stand-by for a Cyber whipping.

By Gerald: Internet Anthropologist Think Tank.
Aug 14, 08

And somebody is messing with the only Military Force willing to
identify the WWW as a domain and express the need to dominate it
like they do the AIR. On demand.

In the mean while the WWW stands as a target, with minimal defenses.
USA Air Force has the means, power, and the forces to develop a paradigm
for defense and offense. And someone kills the effort in the middle of a Cyber
War in Georgia and Russia.

The public should be informed of the name of the person derailing this much needed
force.
...According to an Air Force source, Admiral Mike Mullen ( also opposes Iranian attack, not sure how he feels about Nuclear Iran. G)--chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff--wants the Navy to be involved. ( Admiral !, seems Air Force caught the Navy napping, so the 8,000 man Air Force Cyber command will be dropped. )

The Navy has the best OSINT and most computers, but not the vision or WWW paradigm concepts the Air Force has and they are ready to deploy NOW.

Even in a crash program Navy is six months to a year away from deploying.

USA Government ( NAVY ) is ignoring a threat superior to WMD at the peril of its citizens, and its culture, and economic system.
And don't expect much Government help, we saw Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans,
and they were at their best...
Plan to take care of your self. Web down, = Shortwave & CBs, cash...self help
The Government has not even trained for the WWW going down for an extended period.

It is USA's Achilles heel the government is ignoring.

Infections rapant on WWW, highest rate in history.

A domain of WAR, without a military defense.

Gerald
NO Force has a good handle on the Internet Paradigm, Army blocking/banning bloggers, Navy blocking Air Force, Air Force is on FAST track ...even bot net plan.

Cyber whipping.

Russian method for cyber attack for dummies.

Related articles by Zemanta

• US Air Force halts plans to establish a Cyber Command
• Ex-Air Force Chief Cites Dissension in Pentagon
• Gates vs. the Air Force
• BREAKING: Two Top AF Officers Forced Out
• Preparing for cyber warfare: US Air Force floats botnet plan
• US Air Force: Looking for a few good cyber warriors

ETIM run from USA

and


Bot surveillance unit strikes again.....

Internet Anthropologist Cyber Battalion is pleased to announce another victory in the ongoing cyber war. I am extremely proud of our troops valiant and exemplary performance exhibited throughout this exercise. Our PUBLIC company.

East Turkestan Islamic Movement webmaster/strategist is run from the USA

And I commend their efforts and continued tenacious dedication toward our mission; The pursuit of online terrorist targets.

Today our Cyber troops have once again executed a successful strike on target.

Remember al-jinan.org threat for a cyber attack on the USA ?
We were there. We commenced exposing them on Infovald's forum.
At TOI (time of incident) Bill directed and supervised the critical operation. Exhaustively, conducting a successful penetration of the target via, a broad based multi phased cy-ops initiative. This incorporated the development and dissemination of key Intel against Islam's chief hacker, while tracking and tracing him across the vastness of the Internet with precision.

Our ethnographic studies were extremely effective in helping to develop the paradigm for taking down the web-site, and disabling and dismantling the group. We continue our cyber surveillance of certain group members in ongoing operations to date.
In this instance we took the site down 3 days prior to their announced attack, and rendered their program usless and, as well, burned the chief hacker publicly.

We have to date disclosed approximately 5% of our over-all special ops and the remaining are held classified.

We have hundreds of active contacts within key IC agencies; FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, Army, Air Force, Navy, Pentagon, Special Forces, State Department and our entrenched Civilian Corps.
So Keep the tips coming.

Today our new Bot Surveillance Units ( BSU's ) have yet claimed another enemy target.
The web-master and tactician for His proxies and extensive security measures were for naught and have been strategically breeched and foiled.

Note: This group may be connected with two videos threatening attacks on the Olympic Games in China.
Two Americans were recently killed in China in an unprovoked act of violence.
Breaking...more shortly
standby: for IP and location:

Islamic Party of Turkistan
Location Houston, Texas, United States
IP 70.84.48.66:4145
IPS homestar.typein.net
PC language: PC: zh-cn (Chinese/China)

August 07, 2008

Second Threat Against Olympics from Islamic Party of Turkistan Released on Youtube

A group calling itself the Islamic Party of Turkistan has issued a second threat against the Olympic Games in Beijing. Laura Mansfield is working on a translation of the statement.

What is interesting is that the threat was released on Youtube by a user calling himself mjawazi and the official Youtube Channel for this group, tipawazi

SOURCE: Jawa

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

China discovers al Qaeda in its backyard

By Walid Phares

In a video accusing China's Communist Government of "mistreating Muslims" a Jihadi group threatened to attack the Summer Games in Beijin. A spokesman of the Turkistan Islamic Party accuses China of "forcing Muslims into atheism and destroying Islamic schools. The "Turkistan Islamic Party" is most likely based across the border in Pakistan, where sources affirm it received training from Al Qaeda.

Weeks ago the organization claimed responsibility for a bombings across the country. The latest video shows graphics of a burning Olympics logo and explosions. This week, attackers killed 16 police and wounded more than a dozen in the Xinjiang city of Kashgar using homemade bombs.

SOURCE: CounterTerrorism Blog:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

New spasm of violence in western China as 7 die in wave of bombings
By Jim Yardley
Published: August 11, 2008

BEIJING: The violence in the western Chinese region of Xinjiang rose sharply Sunday morning with the deaths of a security guard and at least six suspects after a daring series of bombings that began with a predawn assault on a police station, the state news media reported.

The attacks, coinciding with the first weekend of the Beijing Olympics, occurred less than a week after what the Chinese authorities had previously described as China's worst terrorist assault in recent memory, in the Xinjiang city of Kashgar. Last Monday, two Uighur Muslims rammed a truck into a group of paramilitary officers who were doing their morning exercises, then attacked with explosives and knives. Sixteen officers were killed and several more were wounded.

The violence came as the Chinese authorities have accused the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, or ETIM, of plotting terror attacks against the Olympics. The Chinese government and the United States State Department list the group as a terrorist organization, though some specialists on Xinjiang question its scope and potency. Some human rights groups have accused China of exaggerating the threat to justify its crackdown against Uighurs

SOURCE:



Gerald
Internet Anthropologist
How I work, Internet Anthropology and the GWOT


Our Terrorist site search engine over 11,000,000 terror pages Indexed: Here

Our warning to Lars Viks before the Death threat was made public.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Warning of Attacks on Olympics Is Said to Be Linked to Muslim Separatist Group
• Attack in China Kills 16 Border Patrol Officers
• A China Threat From Pakistan?
• Deadly ambush rattles Beijing ahead of Games
• Report: Attack kills 8 in remote China

Evil, Satan, WEST: NOT: NUKE paradigm

Kuwaiti Columnist Denounces Anti-West Discourse in Middle East

In an article in the Kuwaiti English-language daily Arab Times, columnist Dr. Khaled Al-Janfawi denounced the anti-West discourse prevailing in the Middle East. He argued that this discourse, which promotes a distorted and biased image of the West, leads to hostility and extremism and is one of the roots of the culture of violence in the Middle East. He added that in order to promote tolerance and democracy in the Arab world, there was a need for school curricula that do not demonize the other but instead stress the importance of diversity and pluralism.

Rest of the Story: SOURCE:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

While Western science is desired even coveted in the Middle East, the Western culture is Demonized.

The demonization is an attempt to hold their cultural wall against change.

There are several natural forces working against their cultural wall.

You will note the small Green "arabic flag" at the top of all my posts.
It allows translation to Arabic of my posts, just click on it.

Google is an Engine of social change, their translation services offer communication
breaking the language barrier, of course its a Googalization of the message, but
I think the concepts get thru.

Person to person communication.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

New research out this week from Gartner tells us that the amount of PCs being used around the world has now passed the 1 billion mark, and that number is set to double in the next 6 years.

( World population is around 7 billion )

http://www.lavasoft.com/company/blog/?p=406

http://snipurl.com/2o73z

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

USA has over 100,000 troops in Theater, TRAIN THEM TO BLOG:
Potential 25,000 troop blogs, huge untrained asset, NOT DEPLOYED.
Military needs to view the WWW not as something to fear, but as a Information
weapon in the GWOT.
Terroist have 6,000+ blogs, forums, Military could overwhelm them with
trained Bloggers, ( Rule sets, guidelines, oversight ) and stop fearing the Internet.
The risk in not using a Troop Bloggers, is far exceeded by allowing as-Sahab
al qaeda's media arm to win the information WAR, recruiting, propaganda,
suicide bombers, funding, sourcing independent cells.

"It is just plain embarrassing that al-Qaeda is better at communicating its message on the Internet than America," Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said in a speech in November."As one foreign diplomat asked a couple of years ago, 'How has one man in a cave managed to out-communicate the world's greatest communication society?' "

al Qaeda setting the Internet paradigm.

The air Force has the key Paradigm for WWW offensive capabilities,
and seem to be uncertain if they are up to the MISSION, ( Air Force takes 2 steps BACK )
while the Army has the force, capability to DOMINATE THE WWW INFORMATION WAR,
and have rejected the mission, instituting repressive rules and regs. effectively blocking troops from blogging. currently Army bloggers need approval and article review of 3 or 4 line officers
to publish each post.

Paradigm problem: Military has problems recognizing new domains, and fears engaging the enemy on these new fields of battle, while al Qaeda only continues to exist; because they embrace and exploit the new domain. While the Western military fears the new domains.
And civilization is at risk, while al Qaeda dominates these domains, WWW and Info war. ( 6 months to a NUKE )
( We never fought there before, not our job, too risky, don't know how, nobody told us to fight there, ETC. )

..................................................

Back to the Point Middle Eastern demonization of USA.

While the Middle East fear change, American Culture is a force of its own, greater then the forces
of the Military in many ways.
American culture has very little "selling pressure", and a lot of "buying Pressure".
NO one likes to be sold but everyone likes to buy.
"Buying pressure" is internally generated by the buyer.
Cultures have minimal impact on this type of buying pressure.
Their cultural wall is doomed to crumble.
And the West will be un-demonized in time.

American style, movies, music transend most cultural barriers, and threaten change.
Look at Cokc cola.

The West is NOT Satan. ( Read the Troop Blogs, ooppps they haven't been deployed )

In the long term American culture will un-demonize the West, but that takes time.
And in this time of non-state actors in the GWOT we may not have that time.

State actors with a religious bent towards state suicide are problematic.
WHY Iran will push the button

Long term the world is secure, short term the world is at catastrophic risk.

Gerald

I just realized there is not a force anywhere in the world that the US Military is afraid of, EXCEPT THE INTERNET, that knocks their little knees together.

.

Related articles

• Arab broadcasters criticize media charter [via Zemanta]

Intel and Ops Update

Analysis: Assad’s one half-truth and three lies to al Watan

April 27, 2008, 2:42 PM (GMT+02:00)

Elements of the Syrian-North Korean reactor’s cooling system

In an interview Sunday, April 27 with the Qatari daily al Watan , Syrian president Bashar Assad said: "We don’t want a nuclear bomb, even if Iran acquires one.” DEBKAfile’s military sources say that was only half true.

What he omitted to mention was the division of labor agreed between Damascus and Tehran in a potential war against Israel: The Syrian reactor Israel destroyed last September would produce “dirty weapons,” while Iran would go for a nuclear bomb. Tehran therefore funded the North Korean reactor in Syria. The radiological weapons made there were to be distributed to the terrorist organizations fighting Israel and used as leverage to control them.
More...

---

Karzai escapes Taliban attempt on his life at military parade in Kabul

April 27, 2008, 1:21 PM (GMT+02:00)

Afghan president Hamid Karzai and other dignitaries, including the US ambassador, were safe after being swiftly hustled off the saluting stand away from the explosions and gunfire. Hundreds fled. Two Afghan lawmakers were said to have been injured. According to one report, four suiciders armed with bomb vests and guns carried out the attack. The parade Sunday, April 27, marked the 16th anniversary of the Soviet Army’s defeat in Afghanistan.

---

Exclusive: First frank talk of potential war on Iran from top US soldier

April 26, 2008, 10:10 AM (GMT+02:00)

Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff

Addressing a news conference in Washington, Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Friday, April 25, the Pentagon is planning for “potential military courses of action” against Iran. He spoke of the Tehran government’s “increasingly lethal and malign influence” in Iraq. A conflict with Iran would be “extremely stressing” he said, but not impossible and “it would be a mistake to think that we are out of combat capability.” The admiral stressed the reserve capabilities of the Navy and Air Force.
More...

Israel Air Force Chief: Iran is a serious threat. We should trust only ourselves

April 25, 2008, 7:37 PM (GMT+02:00)

Maj. Gen. Eliezer Shkedy

Maj. Gen. Eliezer Shkedy tells CBCNews 60 Minutes Bob Simon that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s threats against Israel must be taken extremely seriously. In an interview to be aired Sunday, April 27, the general said: “I think it is a very serious threat to the state of Israel, but more than this, to the whole world. They are talking about what destroying and wiping us from the earth.”

He said it reminds him of the Holocaust. “We should remember. We cannot forget, We should trust only ourselves.”
More...

---

Exclusive: Closest aide of Hamas hard-line Khaled Meshaal dies in suspicious "accident"

April 25, 2008, 10:07 AM (GMT+02:00)

Mysterious death in Damascus of his top aide

DEBKAfile’s counter-terror sources report that Hisham Faiz Abu Libda, Khaled Meshaal’s chef de bureau, was killed in Damascus by a hit-and-run car. Syrian authorities have ordered a blackout on the incident. His was the second mysterious death of a high-profile terrorist in the Syrian capital in recent weeks after Hizballah’s military chief Imad Mughniyeh was blown up in a high-security district on Feb. 13.
More...

Analysis: Assad caught red-handed may now go for revenge

April 25, 2008, 6:54 PM (GMT+02:00)

Ready for nuclear fuel rods as per North Korean model

US and Israel intelligence experts upgrade the chances of president Bashar Assad retaliating for the Israeli attack, which irreparably damaged the secret nuclear North Korea built for him in eastern Syria - now that the episode is out in the open. DEBKAfile quotes those experts as recalling Saddam Hussein’s burning ambition to hit Israel’s nuclear site at Dimona after Israeli jets smashed Iraq’s French built nuclear reactor in 1981.
More...

• What's With Port 20329?, (Sun, Apr 27th)

  - 8 hours ago

  According to the DShield Trends report, tcp/20329 is way out of line for the past couple of days.nb ...(more)...

• Clear Iranian role in Baghdad violence: military

  - 12 hours ago

  Iraqi and US military commanders on Sunday claimed a clear Iranian role in violence engulfing Baghdad's Sadr City, where Shiite militiamen have been battling security forces for the past month.

• The originator of “Red Heart China” gets his website hacked!! Europeans responsible?

  - 1 day ago

  Started to wonder why all those hearts were appearing on Chinese blogs and the answer may just be, the Red Heart China MSN : About 2.3 million Chinese MSN users have added a pattern of “red heart” and the English w...

• 
  

Microsoft didn't crush Storm, counter researchers

menelaus writes "Microsoft Corp. didn't crush the Storm botnet as it has claimed, rival security researchers argued today. Instead, the criminals responsible for the army of compromised computers diversified last year to avoid attention and expand their business.

Paul Ferguson, a network architect, and Jamz Yaneza, a research project manager, both at Trend Micro Inc., disputed Microsoft's contention that its Malicious Software Removal Tool (MSRT) had beaten Storm into submission.

The MSRT is a program that Microsoft updates and automatically redistributes to Windows users each month on Patch Tuesday. It includes definitions for the most popular malware, sniffs systems for malicious code and then deletes it. Microsoft first added detection for the Storm Trojan horse in September 2007.

By the company's count, the MSRT cleaned more than 526,000 Storm-infected PCs in the final four months of last year. After some back and forth between the Storm bot herders and Microsoft, the former gave up, said Jimmy Kuo, a senior security architect at the company.

"Even though they were able to maintain parts of their botnet, they knew they were in our gun sights," Kuo said in an interview earlier this week. "And ultimately they gave up."

Not so fast, said Trend Micro.

"The MSRT had an impact on Storm," Ferguson acknowledged, citing Trend Micro statistics that showed a 20% to 25% reduction in the number of bots within the Storm botnet late last year. "But there are some key gaps in the reality on the ground.

"Storm is still out there," he said. And active. "We've seen campaigns to renew their [botnet] body count within the last 48 hours," Ferguson said.

The full article can be found at computerworld.com." Like I said...others have picked up where storm may have dropped off. It doesn't sound like Storm has really dropped off that much. Its a much more difficult scenario now with smaller botnets running from more locations all over the world.

.

AIR FORCE INTERNET PARADIGM ERROR

BUMPED SEE SECOND SECTION IF YOU HAVE ALREADY READ FIRST.

FIRST SECTION:

The Dogs of Web War

By Rebecca Grant
After years of claims and counterclaims concerning the severity of national security threats in cyberspace, the picture is at last starting to become clear. Recent jousting within cyberspace has provided clues about what to expect from combat in this new domain.

EXCERPTed:

The new Cyber Command will focus dedicated attention to the problem. Elder and others are working to lay the foundation for a cyberspace career path in the Air Force on a par with those for weapons systems and specialties. "We're looking to set up a professional cadre of cyber operators, and this would be enlisted and officer," Elder said.

Investing now in survivability should help keep down the costs of buying new technology. A prime system is the Combat Information Transport System Block 30. "This is a system that is reducing our exposure to the commercial Internet," said Elder. "It's providing us much greater situational awareness in terms of being able to track the traffic on our networks.

( SURVIVABILITY? ? ?...I am aghast. The main mode of handling the cyber threat is "SURVIVABILITY". While this is crucial, its a poor paradigm. The Marines don't have as their main paradigm DEFENSE. THE main paradigm should be offensive. KILL THE ATTACKERS. G. )


Already, however, Cartwright hinted at a greater freedom of action in the cyberspace commons. "Once you leave our shores, then the military authorities start to be present, and what we do is layer the defenses out as best we can to get the most warning, situation awareness that we can to protect our interests," he said.

Given the constant probing, investing in survivability is a big priority. The cyber balance of power is "the most dynamic world we've ever seen," said a senior STRATCOM official. Software security fixes may just last for hours.

( NOTHING ABOUT OFFENSIVE CAPABILITIES, DESTROYING THE ATTACKERS WEAPON, THEIR server/PC. FOCUS IS NOT DEVELOPED YET. G )

Investment will fund software tools to track vulnerabilities "before the hackers find them," said Elder, and insulate them with database wrappers that create portals to block incursions. The Air Force is also investing in extensive database encryption—a proven technique. "It's just much more difficult for someone to fool with your system when the data's encrypted," Elder said.
Yet it may take an increased sense of strategic threat to force clarification of the cyberspace mission.

Currently, there are classic divides. The intelligence community uses cyberspace in its tradecraft. Yet there is growing demand for operators to be able to exploit the same turf.

Also yet to be determined is how much traction the Air Force is getting with its commitment to cyberspace.

( NOT MUCH TRACTION, GWOT HAS BEEN IN EFFECT FOR 6 YRS AND AIR FORCE DOESN'T EVEN HAVE ACTIVE CYBERWAR, WEB PAGE OR ACTIVE RSS FEEDS FOR THE WWW SERVICE, NAVY ( NNIC ) IS WAY AHEAD ON OSINT AND ITS VALUE/CAPABILITIES. They have a web page but I can't get into, no sec. clearance, which is ok, and no public face. G )


US armed forces face "peer" adversaries in only one area—military cyberspace. ( NOT )


More than ever before, cyberspace is on the minds of America's top leaders. Air Force Gen. Kevin P. Chilton, the new head of US Strategic Command, said during his confirmation hearing that "attacks impacting our freedom to operate in space and cyberspace pose serious strategic threats."

Defending the nation from cyberspace attacks is STRATCOM's mission—but one of the big challenges is assessing the strategic threat and demarcating lines of response.

It all begins with knowing the adversary. China is at the top of most lists of nations with advanced cyber capability—and the will to use it. ( The RBN has more advanced capabilities, G )

Because of the overall tenor of military competition with China, every report of Chinese activity raises hackles. In fact, there's been a steady level of reported skirmishing in cyberspace this decade.

Tactic No. 1 is near-constant pressure on US government systems. The goal of these attacks is to breach systems and leave behind malicious code capable of redirecting network activity or enabling access to stored data—to change it or steal it. "Cyber is all about 'protect it or steal it,'" Lt. Gen. Robert J. Elder Jr., commander of 8th Air Force and USAF's point man on cyber issues, said last year.

"Estonia was kind of a wake-up call," said Marine Corps Gen. James E. Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and previous head of STRATCOM. "We've got to make sure we have situation awareness at a scale commensurate with our equities."

All doubt about Chinese culpability in these sorts of attacks vanished shortly after Russia's likely assault on Estonia. Pentagon sources acknowledged that a Chinese attack broke into an unclassified e-mail system used by the Office of the Secretary of Defense in June 2007. As reported by the Financial Times, the Pentagon attributed the attacks not only to Chinese server locations but to the People's Liberation Army itself.



Air Force Lt. Gen. Daniel P. Leaf, deputy commander at US Pacific Command, told the Washington Times in November 2007 that computer attacks were a growing problem. "We're very concerned about that—for the information that may be contained on [the networks] or for the activities we conduct that are command and control and situation awareness related," he said.

The attacks are of interest not for their fleeting effects—but for what they suggest about adversary intent, evolving capabilities, and the potential for debilitating breaches.

( I WANT TO HEAR COMPLAINTS FROM ATTACKERS ABOUT PC HARD DRIVES/SERVERS BEING DESTROYED, ABOUT THE USA MILITARY HARSH DEALINGS WITH HACKERS, G )

"China has put a lot of resources into this business," said Elder. Communist China's public doctrine calls for dominating the five domains of air, land, sea, space, and the electromagnetic spectrum. Although "they're the only nation that's been quite that blatant," Elder said, "they're not our only peer adversary."



The Air Force has recently taken bold action in this regard. In 2005, it elevated cyberspace to a level on par with air and space, when cyberspace was added to USAF's mission statement.
Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright (l) meets with USAF Lt. Gen. Robert Elder for a status brief on issues including the stand-up of Cyberspace Command.


Rules of Engagement ( NONE )
Elder himself oversaw the service's cyberwar capabilities during the time when the mission was being reinforced by the creation of a new Cyber Command, the Air Force's 10th major command.

A larger policy problem rests with calibrating cyberspace operations to a scale of legitimate action. Over the last decade, rules of engagement for kinetic military operations—like targeting a terrorist safehouse in Iraq—have become highly refined.

Theater-level rules of engagement, collateral damage estimation, and positive identification all must be observed before any strike takes place. Rules such as these keep responses proportionate to the political-military goals of an operation. It's a framework familiar to the hundreds of thousands of US troops operating around the world today.

With cyberspace operations, that framework is not so prominent. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said recently that China "must respect a set of game rules."

But what are those rules, and what constitutes a breach? Connecting cyberspace activities to the geographical norms of international politics is no easy task.

( YES IT IS, IF AN ATTACK COMES FROM XYZ SERVER, TAKE IT DOWN, USA HAS A RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE, IF A SERVER HAS POOR SECURITY, AND IS COMPROMISED, USED FOR AN ATTACK, USA STILL HAS A RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE, AND THE RIGHT TO TAKE OUT THE ATTACKING SERVER OR PC. WHICH WILL ALSO FORCE OWNERS OF THE SERVERS TO USE GOOD SECURITY AND VET USERS. G )


For centuries, most international law has depended on the concept of sovereign borders and sovereign rights of states to gauge legitimacy. Everything from the Geneva Convention to the law of armed conflict is predicated on most offenses taking place between—or within—sovereign states. Rules of war also take for granted that events occur at a physical location tracing back to a nation-state.

It is easy to tell when a state is using tanks or artillery against its neighbors or its own populace. With cyber attacks, it's unclear when and whether the state is involved.

( DOESN'T MATTER, IF IT IS STATE SPONSORED OR NOT, AN ATTACK IS AN ATTACK, USA HAS A RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE. POLICE ARE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT OWNERSHIP OF A BUILDING A SNIPER IS IN, THEY TAKE OUT THE THREAT. G )

Tracing attacks back to the originating Internet service provider does yield a physical location. (Cyberspace is projected from a physical infrastructure of servers, routers, and computers that have definite and sovereign physical locations.) However, cyberspace exists in a domain deemed independent of the nation-state.

What's harder to establish is whether people conducting the attacks are hackers working on their own or at a government's behest. If a computer remotely "occupied" by hackers traces a physical location to China, that is not necessarily evidence that China is behind the scheme. The ambiguity works both ways, however. If China is behind an attack, it has built-in deniability.
Estonian police use tear gas and truncheons to disperse a crowd protesting the removal of a bronze statue of a Russian soldier from the center of the capital city. The clash resulted in a massive cyber attack on government and private Web sites.


A Fundemental Question
"In this environment it's just very difficult to tell the point of origin," said Cartwright. "The source of the activity can be widely separated. Al Qaeda can live on a US ISP and execute from someplace else. How do we handle that?"

( TAKE OUT THE ATTACKING SERVER OR PC, THIS WILL IN THE LONG RUN HELP SERVICE PROVIDERS EXPAND SECURITY, FROM A BOTTOM LINE VIEW, G )

It boils down to a fundamental question: When does an attack in cyberspace become a de jure attack? Even in the case of Estonia, protected by NATO's collective defense principle, the proper response to last spring's attack was open to debate.

( THERE WAS AN ATTACK, AND IT WAS TRACED TO SPECIFIC SERVERS, HOWEVER THE PERSONS CAUSING THE ATTACK WERE UNKNOWN, WHY WERE THE SERVERS NOT TAKEN OUT? G)



Still undefined is the proper role for the US military. Inside the United States, legal precedent and direction limits what the military can do. According to Cartwright, "If it's inside the US, if we're to do anything about it, it's got to be on dot.mil" for the military to act. Most classified military networks are self-contained and rarely subject to the same barrage of attacks carried via the Internet.

"If it's outside that and they want the military to do anything about it, then its military support to civil authorities just like we would do with a hurricane or anything else," he explained.

In fact, it's the Department of Homeland Security that houses the key response teams for responding to Internet attack.

Already, however, Cartwright hinted at a greater freedom of action in the cyberspace commons. "Once you leave our shores, then the military authorities start to be present, and what we do is layer the defenses out as best we can to get the most warning, situation awareness that we can to protect our interests," he said.

Given the constant probing, investing in survivability is a big priority. The cyber balance of power is "the most dynamic world we've ever seen," said a senior STRATCOM official. Software security fixes may just last for hours.

Expect to see an impact on Air Force budgets as service leaders fund the new mission. "What we're trying to do in '08 and '09 is to accelerate the programs that are tied to survivability of the Air Force portion of the global information grid," Elder said.

The new Cyber Command will focus dedicated attention to the problem. Elder and others are working to lay the foundation for a cyberspace career path in the Air Force on a par with those for weapons systems and specialties. "We're looking to set up a professional cadre of cyber operators, and this would be enlisted and officer," Elder said.

Investing now in survivability should help keep down the costs of buying new technology. A prime system is the Combat Information Transport System Block 30. "This is a system that is reducing our exposure to the commercial Internet," said Elder. "It's providing us much greater situational awareness in terms of being able to track the traffic on our networks."

Serious money is going to the effort. "Some things we're trying to do with the CITS Block 30, for example, are in the range of half a billion dollars," Elder said.

( WHEN WILL THEY HAVE "RULES OF ENGAGEMENT" ABILITY TO GO ON THE OFFENSIVE? IF ATTACKED USA HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE OUT THE ATTACKER. IF A SERVICE PROVIDER LOOSES A SERVER BECAUSE OF POOR SECURITY OR LACK OF OVER SIGHT ON WHOM THEY LET USE THE SERVER, THAT SHOULD NOT DETER USA FROM COUNTER STRIKING AN ATTACKING SERVER. G )

Investment will fund software tools to track vulnerabilities "before the hackers find them," said Elder, and insulate them with database wrappers that create portals to block incursions. The Air Force is also investing in extensive database encryption—a proven technique. "It's just much more difficult for someone to fool with your system when the data's encrypted," Elder said.
Yet it may take an increased sense of strategic threat to force clarification of the cyberspace mission.

Currently, there are classic divides. The intelligence community uses cyberspace in its tradecraft. Yet there is growing demand for operators to be able to exploit the same turf.

Creating Effects
Many acknowledge the current US cyberspace strategy is "dysfunctional"—to use Cartwright's term from when he headed STRATCOM. But there's been only tepid enthusiasm for the Air Force's willingness to step up to the growing mission. Ultimately, the Air Force may be recognized as the chief force provider for cyber capabilities. Signs suggest it won't come without a period of debate.

That debate will center first on the logic of cyberspace as a domain. To Air Force planners, the domain aspects have become self-evident. Cyberspace operations include activity to maintain the freedom to attack and freedom from attack in that domain. In fact, counterdomain operations are being defined, too.

As Elder put it, "The better your cyber is, the [more] quickly you can do decision-making, [to] create effects." Degrading and slowing operations—especially to the point where "you can't operate anymore"—creates what Elder termed a "counterdomain effect."

Not all accept cyberspace as a clear-cut domain like air, space, or the sea, however. Cartwright, for one, pointed out that it all turns in part on whether cyberspace is to be treated as a truly separate and co-equal area of warfare. "That's the huge debate," he said. "Should this be a domain or not be a domain?"

( ONLY A TROGLIDITE , WOULD CLAIM THE WEB ISN'T A DOMAIN, I THINK AL QAEDA HAS PROVED THAT HYPOTHESIS. G )

Even as the pace of activity escalates, there's a sense of proceeding carefully. Part of the concern rests with a reluctance to lock in poor solutions.

( "LOCK IN " IS BS FOR LACK OF DECISION MAKING, NOTHING IS LOCKED IN, IT WILL BE TRIAL AND ERROR. G )

Cartwright urged senior leaders to recognize how much there is to learn from the younger generation. "The Joint Staff is an old staff, demographically," he said. "So here we are, in charge of thinking our way through cyber without the 20-somethings."

He warned against putting in place a rigid doctrine for cyberspace that might end up squashing the creative thinking that has always been a hallmark of the domain.

"If we try to use our industrial-age Napoleonic decision structures, are we disadvantaging ourselves?" asked Cartwright. He saw "a lot of cultural issues that far outreach the technical issues and the organizational constructs. What I'm most concerned about is protecting the decision space and the opportunity space of the 20-somethings."

But he stopped well short of handing over the cyber mantle to the Air Force. "Where we are right now, each of the services has found value," Cartwright said. The Air Force is making investments and letting its money "speak about their risk equations. We've got enough time to let that play out."

( EVENTUALLY EACH SERVICE WILL HAVE ITS OWN CYBER FORCE. G )

Rebecca Grant is a contributing editor of Air Force Magazine. She is president of IRIS Independent Research in Washington, D.C., and has worked for RAND, the Secretary of the Air Force, and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Grant is a fellow of the Eaker Institute for Aerospace Concepts, the public policy and research arm of the Air Force Association. Her most recent article, "There When it Counts," appeared in the December 2007 issue.

SOURCE:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Its just so frustrating to see discussions of fiat acompli like they are NOT.
Is the WWW a domain, is something that is self evident, to the Internet
I don't want to hear from anyone that doesn't have a PC on his desk, and I suspect there are a lot of general officers that don't , and they should be replaced.

"US armed forces face "peer" adversaries in only one area—military cyberspace." NOT. USA armed forces are 5 years behind, force projection on the www.

This reminds me of, I think it was Doolittle, that exposed the air as a domain by bombing some battle ships to the bottom of the sea, to show air as force projection.

The Internet itself is at sever risk NOW.
The world is facing a Pearl Harbor www attack that could take out the Internet.
And they are discussing if it is a domain?

Hell: there is a new www WMD and we are still discussing if its a "domain" we are 5 years behind.

The same logic that applies to coastal defenses applies to server and net defenses.
Offense not defense. ( I'm not saying to drop defenses but we MUST have and use a offensive capability. Right now it takes an ok FROM BUSH, to take down a server.)
Would any military service exist with out offensive capabilities?
We acting with out rules of engagement on the WWW, USA IS AN EASY,SAFE
TARGET.
If USA used the rules of engagement in Iraq as they use on the WWW, USA would have surrendered by now.

NSA is hiding all the cool www side arms.
Our Intel paradigm on NSA remains confidential, their capabilities boggle the mind.


Gerald


"





SECOND SECTION

UPDATE:

US reveals plans to hit back at cyber threats

MY COMMENTS IN CAPS.G

Tom Espiner ZDNet.co.uk

Published: 02 Apr 2008 17:27 BST

The US Air Force Cyber Command is developing capabilities to inflict denial of service, confidential data loss, data manipulation, and system integrity loss on its adversaries, and to combine these with physical attacks, according to a senior US general.

Air Force Cyber Command (AFCYBER), a US military unit set up in September 2007 to fight in cyberspace, is due to become fully operational in the autumn under the aegis of the US Eighth Air Force. Lieutenant general Robert J Elder, Jr, who commands the Eighth Air Force's Barksdale base, told ZDNet.co.uk at the Cyber Warfare Conference 2008 that Air Force is interested in developing its capabilities to attack enemy forces as well as defend critical national infrastructure.

"Offensive cyberattacks in network warfare make kinetic attacks more effective, [for example] if we take out an adversary's integrated defence systems or weapons systems," said Elder. "This is exploiting cyber to achieve our objectives."

However, this is a double-edged sword, as adversaries will also attempt to develop similar capabilities, especially considering the US military's heavy use of technology, said Elder.

NOW THIS IS A ONE EDGED SWORD, THEY MAY HAVE THAT CAPABILITY, USA DOES NOT AND WOULD NEED BUSH'S OK TO ENGAGE. G

"Terrorists and criminals are doing the same thing. We depend so heavily as a military on the use of cyber, we have to be cautious about it," said Elder. "Cyber gives us a huge advantage but adversaries look at our capabilities and see areas they can undermine. We need to protect our asymmetric advantage — on the one hand by having people further exploit cyber, and on the other by having mission assurance."

This problem is made more pressing by the military's reliance on the public internet to perpetrate cyberattacks. The infrastructure the US military uses to both launch and defend against cyberattacks runs through the public internet system. Military networks such as the Global Information Grid are linked to US government and critical national infrastructure systems, which in turn are linked to the public internet. Adversary systems are subverted by the US military through public channels — however, this also leaves the US military open to attack through the same channels, said Elder.

ELDER IS MISSING A GOOD POINT HERE, IF THE PUBLIC INTERNET SYSTEM IS TAKEN DOWN WHAT HAPPENS TO THE C2 FOR THE MILITARY.G

"The infrastructure on which the Air Force depends is controlled by both military and commercial entities and is vulnerable to attacks and manipulation," said Elder.

Other causes for military concern include possible supply-chain vulnerabilities, where vulnerabilities are introduced into chipsets during manufacturing that an adversary can then exploit, and electronics vulnerabilities.

"We need to make sure chips aren't manipulated — we're worried about information assurance just like everyone else," said Elder.

Other problems being faced by the Cyber Command are centred around different Air Force and military units needing to improve their channels of communication before the autumn.

"We have 10,000 people to do this, but the problem is they are stovepiped," said Elder.

10,000 PEOPLE THEN WHY ARE THERE 5,000 TERROR WEB SITES STILL UP?
WHY ARE WE ALLOWING THEIR C2 TO FUNCTION ON THE INTERNET?G
I HAVE 100 AND WE ARE COMPILING LISTS OF TERROR SITES.
MY TROOPS JUST VETTED 700 SITES IN 2 DAYS.G

"Stovepiping" has two complementary meanings. In IT terms it describes information held in separate databases which is difficult to access due to its multiple locations — the UK equivalent term would be "siloed". In intelligence-gathering terms — the Eighth also serves as the US Air Force information operations headquarters — "stovepiping" refers to information which has been passed up the chain of command without undergoing due diligence.

Elder said that, while he was satisfied with AFCYBER's covert operations capabilities and its demonstrable ability to remotely destroy missile defence systems, he wished to further develop its attack capabilities.

"IT people set up traditional IT networks with the idea of making them secure to operate and defend," said Elder. "The traditional security approach is to put up barriers, like firewalls — it's a defence thing — but everyone in an operations network is also part of the [attack] force. We're trying to move away from clandestine operations. We're looking for real physics — a bigger bang resulting in collateral damage."

MOVING AWAY FROM COVERT OR CLANDESTINE OPERATIONS ON THE INTERNET
IS THE OPPOSITE OF A FORCE MULTIPLIER. FORCE REDUCER? BAD MOVE. THE INTERNET WAS MADE FOR COVERT OPERATIONS, AND USA HAS THE TECHNOLOGY AND POWER TO DOMINATE THE INTERNET LIKE THE AIR FORCE DOES THE AIR.
THE PARADIGM AND EXPERIENCED LEADERSHIP IS MISSING.G

For deterrence we have to clearly identify the attacker. We're working on rapid forensics to determine who the adversary is.

WITH BOT NETS I DON'T THINK THIS IS POSSIBLE OR THAT YOU CAN DO IT WITH CURRENT TECHNOLOGY.G


Lieutenant general Robert J Elder, Jr

US Cyber Command also needs to develop the means to quickly pinpoint exactly where an attack is coming from, to be able to retaliate, and also to deter potential attackers.

"We haven't done a good job in the cyber-domain just yet," said Elder. "We have to demonstrate the capability to do [rapid forensics] then message that to our adversaries. For deterrence we have to clearly identify the attacker. We're working on rapid forensics to determine who the adversary is."

MESSAGE THE ADVERSARIES WE KNOW WHO AND WHERE THEY ARE?
WOULD YOU DO THIS ON A BATTLE FIELD? THIS IS NUTZ, IT MAKES USA A SAFE TARGET AGAIN, YOU ENABLE THEIR ATTACKS WITH THIS PARADIGM. TAKE THE BASTARDS OUT.G
WE ARE UNDER ATTACK. ELDER DOESN'T SEEM TO GET THAT.G

While cyber-espionage was inevitable, said Elder, knowledge of the US military being able to pinpoint the source of cyberattacks could deter assaults on critical national infrastructure that use Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (Scada) systems.

"We're not going to deter cyber-espionage, but we might be able to deter attacks on Scada networks," said Elder.

As well as developing forensics tools, Cyber Command is also coding tools to check for incursions, including a "Cyber Sidearm", which will monitor activity on the Combat Information Transport System — the US Air Force cyber-network.

A CYBER SIDEARM DOES NOT MONITOR, A SIDEARM DOES DAMAGE, YOU DO NOT HAVE A CYBER SIDEARM IF IT ONLY MONITORS, YOU HAVE A DAMAGE RECORDER NOT A SIDEARM. I HAVE BEEN ISSUING CYBER SIDEARMS TO SELECT TROOPS SINCE MAR 22 IN OUR "C" COMPANY THAT CAN DO DAMAGE, QUOTE FROM OUR BLACK WIKI:
"We will issue you a cyber sidearm, and rules of engagement.
Violation of the rules of engagement could result in criminal prosecution, they are strictly for self defense only,
(YOUR PC under attack.).
Use of the small arms may automatically notify the Watch Officer, calling in backup, and alerts me to a situation.
And activates Internal Affairs.

Gerald"



"We've been working to get the functionality built — we're supposed to have it in the next couple of months," said Elder.

US Eighth Air Force said it was seeking partnerships with both public- and private-sector organisations to "secure cyberspace". The Department for Homeland Security's Strategy to Secure Cyberspace includes establishing a public-private architecture to gauge and respond to cyberthreats, and increase information-sharing between public- and private-sector organisations and the military.

SOURCE:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

AIR FORCE IS STILL A GENERATION BEHIND, AND WORKING WITH THE WRONG PARADIGM.

WHEN AN ENEMY JET COMES UP AGAINST THE USA AIR FORCE, THEY RUN AWAY OR DIE.
THAT IS THE PARADIGM FOR THE US AIR FORCE ON THE INTERNET.

YOU DOMINATE YOUR DOMINION BE IT AIR OR CYBER.

GERALD ( WITH ARMS OPEN )
INTERNET ANTHROPOLOGIST
DIRECTOR OF "C" COMPANY

.

USA Air Force says it needs more F-22's

USA Air Force says it needs more F-22's.

I remind the Pentagon that not ONE USA troop has been killed by an enemy Plane in 25 to 30 YEARS.....

....

We would like to see the Air Force get the F-22's in view of their record.

Gerald


.