US Launching A New Cyberwarfare Agency

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Do we really need a new cyberwarfare agency? Sure, we need to protect ourselves, but do we need a completely new agency to do it?

We already have the NSA, FBI, DHS and NCTC, but the White House feels that we're still an acronym short on the cyber warfare front. That's why, later today, the president's counterterrorism chief will announce the Cyber Threat Intelligence Integration Center -- a new department designed to protect America from digital aggressors.
Click to expand...
 
Just throw some money at it.
This administration is awesome at spending my money.:rolleyes:
 
Once we hit 20 trillion everything will balance out and be just fine. :rolleyes:
 
How about instead of hiring more and training more grayhats.... how about establishing a dialog with sysadmins and helping folks to properly secure their networks?

The sheer number of times that I've seen that shitty little stock router/modem/wifi/ everything in one device running a home network is staggering. You know, the ones that are easily owned by anyone accessing it from the WAN side? How about setting decent standards for home routers?
 
In a few years they'll determine that spending all this money accomplished nothing. At least they may put more people to work.
 
Well, if we are serious about the warfare part then it should be part of the military and we should be engaging in both offensive and defensive activities (they could create a joint operations team under the control of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) ... putting that in a civilian agency doesn't make a lot of sense
 
Sp33dFr33k said:
In a few years they'll determine that spending all this money accomplished nothing. At least they may put more people to work.
Click to expand...

Wrong, let's be real shall we, the government will never admit anything like that. Instead they will determine that any lack of progress was caused by inadequate funding and call for a massive spending increase.
 
Yep, just throw more bodies and more money at the "problem". Seems to be the American way. We all know how that works out in the end. 3 years from now, the GAO will come out with a report that CTIIC is over budget and ineffectual. 5 years from now, after a major cyber-attack takes out the electrical grid, a commission will be created by Congress (in candlelight) to examine what went wrong. 7 years from now, there will be a hearing about what the commission found.
 
Kinda surprised on a tech site that deals in articles discussing major security breaches every day that its members would dismiss the idea of an agency to deal with these kind of threats. Do you really think the FBI or CIA are equipped and experienced in this kind of stuff to be our last resort? The other agencies named specialize in certain areas and are not 100% focused on any particular threat. I absolutely think we need an agency that deals exclusively with cyber warfare and nothing else. With the rapid advancing of tactics and capabilities of our enemies and the rate at which kids are learning these things and becoming adults, we need to recruit them to fill these roles. The old suit n' tie guys from the x-files are not up to the task. It seems like every day you read about how plans to a top secret weapon were stolen because someone in area 51 had a computer plugged into the internet, and we all sit here and roll our eyes saying "how stupid could they be?". They need people like us running these departments, not people like your parents.
 
McFry said:
Kinda surprised on a tech site that deals in articles discussing major security breaches every day that its members would dismiss the idea of an agency to deal with these kind of threats. Do you really think the FBI or CIA are equipped and experienced in this kind of stuff to be our last resort? The other agencies named specialize in certain areas and are not 100% focused on any particular threat. I absolutely think we need an agency that deals exclusively with cyber warfare and nothing else. With the rapid advancing of tactics and capabilities of our enemies and the rate at which kids are learning these things and becoming adults, we need to recruit them to fill these roles. The old suit n' tie guys from the x-files are not up to the task. It seems like every day you read about how plans to a top secret weapon were stolen because someone in area 51 had a computer plugged into the internet, and we all sit here and roll our eyes saying "how stupid could they be?". They need people like us running these departments, not people like your parents.
Click to expand...

We aren't dismissing the stated goal, but instead adding another agency to the alphabet soup of existing ones with sections already committed to this task.

If this was consolidating the various groups doing this into one department it might be a good thing, but instead this will be in addition to all the rest and we, the American tax payer, are tired of our checks being raped to support and every growing bureaucracy that has insane level of duplication of efforts.
 
iamwhoiamtoday said:
How about instead of hiring more and training more grayhats.... how about establishing a dialog with sysadmins and helping folks to properly secure their networks?

The sheer number of times that I've seen that shitty little stock router/modem/wifi/ everything in one device running a home network is staggering. You know, the ones that are easily owned by anyone accessing it from the WAN side? How about setting decent standards for home routers?
Click to expand...

When you cram 3 separate devices (router, WAP, switch) into one device, have to write firmware for it and then manufacture,ship, and sell it for $29.95, how could you expect a secure device?
 
No matter the security its still possible to smuggle plans to a top secret planet killer in a small droid.
 
McFry said:
Kinda surprised on a tech site that deals in articles discussing major security breaches every day that its members would dismiss the idea of an agency to deal with these kind of threats. Do you really think the FBI or CIA are equipped and experienced in this kind of stuff to be our last resort? The other agencies named specialize in certain areas and are not 100% focused on any particular threat. I absolutely think we need an agency that deals exclusively with cyber warfare and nothing else. With the rapid advancing of tactics and capabilities of our enemies and the rate at which kids are learning these things and becoming adults, we need to recruit them to fill these roles. The old suit n' tie guys from the x-files are not up to the task. It seems like every day you read about how plans to a top secret weapon were stolen because someone in area 51 had a computer plugged into the internet, and we all sit here and roll our eyes saying "how stupid could they be?". They need people like us running these departments, not people like your parents.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty liberal, but the issue doesn't need to be fixed by a new agency. It needs to be fixed by the private sector. IE. the companies holding the data need to lock everything down better and encrypt (ie. recent Anthem hack - data was not encrypted!). We need to start holding those companies accountable for their lack of security, not create a new agency.
 
McFry said:
Kinda surprised on a tech site that deals in articles discussing major security breaches every day that its members would dismiss the idea of an agency to deal with these kind of threats. Do you really think the FBI or CIA are equipped and experienced in this kind of stuff to be our last resort? The other agencies named specialize in certain areas and are not 100% focused on any particular threat. I absolutely think we need an agency that deals exclusively with cyber warfare and nothing else. With the rapid advancing of tactics and capabilities of our enemies and the rate at which kids are learning these things and becoming adults, we need to recruit them to fill these roles. The old suit n' tie guys from the x-files are not up to the task. It seems like every day you read about how plans to a top secret weapon were stolen because someone in area 51 had a computer plugged into the internet, and we all sit here and roll our eyes saying "how stupid could they be?". They need people like us running these departments, not people like your parents.
Click to expand...

We dismiss the idea because we work in IT. We know how weak the systems are and how easy they are to break. No government agency can do anything about it, it is up to individual businesses and users to take personal responsibility for their own security and not go crying to the federal government when their bad security practices get taken advantage of. We know that educating users on the importance of two-factor authentication and good email behavior would do more for IT security than billions of government dollars.

I disagree that the FBI or CIA cannot handle this duty. It takes millions, if not billions, of dollars to set up an entirely new department, but is far cheaper to create a subdivision within the FBI. Yet another agency also creates issues with cross-departmental sharing of information, which slows the reaction time that is critical for IT security. Of course, the biggest issue is that history has shown time and time again that government agencies run at a pathetic level of efficiency. As others have said, it will end up in GAO investigations (more money) and a report declaring that the new agency overstepped its bounds and wasted its allotted budget.
 
McFry said:
Kinda surprised on a tech site that deals in articles discussing major security breaches every day that its members would dismiss the idea of an agency to deal with these kind of threats. Do you really think the FBI or CIA are equipped and experienced in this kind of stuff to be our last resort? The other agencies named specialize in certain areas and are not 100% focused on any particular threat. I absolutely think we need an agency that deals exclusively with cyber warfare and nothing else. With the rapid advancing of tactics and capabilities of our enemies and the rate at which kids are learning these things and becoming adults, we need to recruit them to fill these roles. The old suit n' tie guys from the x-files are not up to the task. It seems like every day you read about how plans to a top secret weapon were stolen because someone in area 51 had a computer plugged into the internet, and we all sit here and roll our eyes saying "how stupid could they be?". They need people like us running these departments, not people like your parents.
Click to expand...

Please, every agency named has a group/division/swarm/pod whatever you want to call it that deals with their part of cyberspace.
Why not get them talking to one another instead of forming a whole new agency, one that will take a year of committee meetings just to come up with a logo? Hell, all that would need be done is to pass some legislation...pork barreled onto whatever can be snuck in under the radar, to force business to have certain levels of security.....

And just who do you think will head up such an agency? A smart guy......shit no.....it will be some political crony of Obama's just as he is about to step out of the Whitehouse for the last time.

There won't be one guy in this new agency who knows operating systems from operating rooms.....but the "American People" will "feel safer".
 
We don't even know how many agencies we have, much less the employees and projects (boondoggles) they're doing.

Just another way to funnel money to defense contractors, and I guess now tech companies want in on more of that sweet gigantic defense budget clusterf*** action.
 
Steve said:
Do we really need a new cyberwarfare agency? Sure, we need to protect ourselves, but do we need a completely new agency to do it?
Click to expand...

I'd say it's not necessarily a new agency, rather a name for all the guys that have been doing it already and easy way for politicians to use it for political advantage by withholding funding.
 
kbrickley said:
Well, if we are serious about the warfare part then it should be part of the military and we should be engaging in both offensive and defensive activities (they could create a joint operations team under the control of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) ... putting that in a civilian agency doesn't make a lot of sense
Click to expand...

kbrickley is the first to hit the nail on the head.

I agree, this is a waste. First off, the Sony hack was either a Cyber-Attack by a nation state and a DoD problem deserving a DoD response, or it was a criminal act and non-defense related meaning FBI. This brings us to DHS which was created to make sure all these agencies shared stuff so it seems DHS is broke, which we all knew. But I guess it's hopelessly broke which is why we need a new coordinating cyber agency. So let's not fix DHS, instead we will leave it hopelessly broke and wasteful and let's not tell the FBI that they dropped the ball on these two hacks and make them tighten up their shit. Neither of those hacks were actually Cyber-War Hacks, they didn't target and threaten key US infrastructure, the Government, or the Military so they were not "Attacks" directed against the US even if they will be seen as the US is week against a State Sponsored attack. The DoD is not responsible for protecting Sony. Sony is responsible for protecting Sony. The FBI is responsible for catching and if possible bringing criminals to justice.

So, we don't need this new special organization, we need to make the ones that exist work properly. I agree, waste, typical create more government bureaucracy to act as a third and forth layer of band aid over a gaping wound.
 
The NSA is too busy spying on Americans and compiling databases of their activities to look into cyber attacks from foreign sources, so I'm creating a new agency to do just that.
 
Both the Army and the Air Force already have cyber warfare counter intelligence groups. The Air Force's is bigger than the FBI, CIA and, NSA combined. Just what exactly is the new group going to do that isn't already being done?
 
Magnus said:
Both the Army and the Air Force already have cyber warfare counter intelligence groups. The Air Force's is bigger than the FBI, CIA and, NSA combined. Just what exactly is the new group going to do that isn't already being done?
Click to expand...

The Army and the Air Force's Cyber Warfare units are under the DoD Cyber Warfare Command, in other words, both ARCYBER and AFCYBER are sub-elements of CYBERCOM. CYBERCOM itself is the DoD's primary CYBER Warfare element that is charged with both the defensive and Offensive aspects of Cyber warfare as it involves the US Military. If someone is attacking the US Military these are the organizations who will deal with it. If the US is going to conduct Offensive CYBER Attacks against an enemy, it will also be these guys who do it.

They are not responsible for attacks against civilian cyber targets. Furthermore, there are several DoD Networks that are not even physically connected in any way with civilian networks and communications equipment, they are entirely independent and can't be hacked from the Internet because they simply are not part of the Internet to begin with.

As this article explains, this new Cyber Center is going to act as a central control point and clearing house for Cyber Intelligence Information. They plan this to be the one place everyone is supposed to report too so that there is at least one place that has all the answers.

Even so, I think it's a waste and existing agencies could be making this happen if they would do their jobs, in particular DHS. This is part of what they were created for.
 
oh great, another unconstitutional federal spy agency to spy on us. what could this three letter acronym do that the others can't?
 
I say any time a company has a security breach we cut off the limb of the CEO. First one leg, then the other, then an arm, then the other, the finally their head. After a few times of doing this companies will start to care more about security.
 
Madoc said:
The NSA is too busy spying on Americans and compiling databases of their activities to look into cyber attacks from foreign sources, so I'm creating a new agency to do just that.
Click to expand...

Nah, more like NSA has been sullied so here is the new shiny. Like calling foodstamps snap.



I like this:
After 9/11, researchers believed that if the security services' shared data between them, the attacks could possibly have been prevented. According to the Washington Post, that's why the new CTIIC will sit between these agencies, pooling their cyber warfare data in a single place. That way, the next time an attack is mounted, those who need to make decisions will have a full picture in their minds.
Click to expand...

Much info...multiple groups...not good at sharing...lets make another group.
 
I find it funny how much contradiction is going on in here. You like to dismiss the gov having the ability to do something like this but cry foul when he hear stories about the nsa's ability in cyber collection. Get the bad apples out of the nsa and get the good into this new agency and we will have something good.
 
Well, in reference to 9-11, that was 14 years ago.

I know government moves slow, but if this is the push to share information....wow.
 
Well, the response following 9/11, was creating the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in 2004, to facilitate and oversea shared intelligence information.

This article and Aardvark's quote was saying that this new Cyber Center is being created for the same reasons, to share Cyber related info and to focus on Non-Military customers you might say.

Still, although I often disagree with Aardvark we are both in agreement that this is not how you fix a problem.
 
iamwhoiamtoday said:
How about instead of hiring more and training more grayhats.... how about establishing a dialog with sysadmins and helping folks to properly secure their networks?

The sheer number of times that I've seen that shitty little stock router/modem/wifi/ everything in one device running a home network is staggering. You know, the ones that are easily owned by anyone accessing it from the WAN side? How about setting decent standards for home routers?
Click to expand...

How about the Government following their own policies and large corporations being forced to follow standards and be responsible for data loss....

End users will always click links, the router is pointless in these cases.
 
I have no idea how bad the underworld of the net is now since it's all underground now...
Gruber could be in charge of this program too..he's a pretty honest guy..
 
MrGuvernment said:
How about the Government following their own policies and large corporations being forced to follow standards and be responsible for data loss....

End users will always click links, the router is pointless in these cases.
Click to expand...

Nope, not happening that way. It's happening the other way. Government has told business that if they participate in the SAFETY, follow federal IA Policies, Submit their systems to scans to verify compliance, share cyber data on attacks, etc with the Government, that they will absolve business of Civil Liability should they have a breach. Of course if a business doesn't play along then they are open to legal action, but what smart company with money to loose is going to pass up a get out of jail card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top