Internet Anthropologist Think Tank: Cyber command confused maybe mislead.

  • Search our BLOG

  • HOME
    Terrorist Names SEARCH:

    Thursday, September 23, 2010

    Cyber command confused maybe mislead.

    Cyber command confused maybe mislead.

    Cyber Command chief Gen. Keith Alexander:   his command “stand[s] ready to execute the full spectrum of cyber operations on command. And stay prepared to defend our nation’s freedom of action in cyberspace.”

    If they don't have rules of engagement they may have already lost. They can't wait for some command 
    from on high to defend US turf.

    By the time they get the command the WWW could be down, and Ft. Mead, the Cyber Command would then be unable to deploy cyber weapons if the WWW is down.

    “Right now, we do not have a role,” new Cyber Command chief Gen. Keith Alexander tells reporters in a rare on-the-record interview. “Within the United States, I do not believe that’s where Cyber Command should or will operate.”
    Thats really scary, NSA is best positioned to defend the USA against a cyber attack.
    And if they don't defend the USA; then they might not have any thing to defend, it would be 
    shear lunacy to NOT to defend the US critical infrastructure.

    If the infrastructure is lost then so have they lost. A defeat.

    NSA and the Cyber Command may have separate command structures but have the same
    charter to defend the USA. Has NSA made Cyber Command a eunuch?
    It feels like some how they have not separated out the cyber paradigm domain from the Old War domain paradigm, they are different and MUST operate under different rules.
    One is real dimensional and the other is Cyber.

    Much different domains and much different paradigms.

    But one must keep in mind this is NSA, who wouldn't use
    FISA because they were giving out info to someone they
    didn't have control over.

    NSA understands if your talking, communicating
    your giving up Intel. And they don't talk to anyone.
    So on one hand we have all this seeming confusion and 
    on the other hand we have :


    Paradigm Intel says it belongs to NSA and the 
    Cyber Command. An Exquisite piece of code
    and context, 100% Genius. Beyond Israels
    invisible persistent Rootkits.

    There’s also been a parallel discussion about how much the military should do to defend utilities, banks, and other so-called “critical infrastructure” that’s in private hands. Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn recently proposed that the Pentagon establish some sort of hacker-free on-line space for these industries. The companies could opt to join, or they could face thewild wild west of the unprotected internet.”

    This embarrasses me, there is no such thing as "hacker-free on-line space" this statement shows a lack of understanding of the cyber paradigm. And this space cannot be created. It's equivalent to declaring your going to create a "crime free country". I mean neither are possible.

    Alexander likes the general outlines of Lynn’s proposal. “So you’re going to have what I’ll call a secure zone, a protected zone to have your government and critical infrastructure to work in this part. And then we have the zone over here where my kids and I talk,” he says.

    We have a secure zone the DOD net and it is penetrated regularly.
    I just can't believe the head of the cyber command said that, I just don't believe it.

    But Alexander notes that his new military unit couldn’t be a part of that operation. “Cyber Command only works inside the DOD [Department of Defense] networks today, and that’s all our authorities allow us to do — defend and operate within our networks,” he says. “We cannot go out.”
    If that is true, "Cyber Command cannot go outside DOD networks", then its a scare crow a straw man.
    If the WWW is not defended, if the US infrastructure is not defended then Cyber Command is not of much value. How can they operate without the WWW? What is their mission if the US infrastructure is crippled?

    That leaves the Cyber Command in the position of securing the DOD networks which have no command and control without the WWW. 

    Alexander adds that his command “stand[s] ready to execute the full spectrum of cyber operations on command. And stay prepared to defend our nation’s freedom of action in cyberspace.”
    If he has to wait for a "command " to defend the nations freedom of action in cyberspace,
    then he may have already LOST. By the time they make the call and explain the attack,
    it could be over and the WWW to all effects and intent GONE.

    He would then have no vectors to deploy in, the WWW is down.
    Cyber Command seems to be more vapor, mist, could have been, 
    than any real defense force.

    Modeling the cyber paradigm on bad info, assumptions and data.

    Well I guess we still have my  Co.C and my Bot Surveillance Units, sighhh.

    Generals comments sourced from here.

    Tactical Internet Systems analyst.

    The civilian infrastructure needs to be loaded with COWs.
    Internet Anthropologist Think Tank: Don't have a COW man., Cyber ...
    And Cyber Command the ability to collect info from the COWs and deploy
    defense, and in depth via rules of engagement.
    .Google formatting screwing up, bad, bad bad. This is example, wrong color
    I have to go thru and recolor half the text to white.



    Post a Comment

    Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

    << Home