Pentagon: Cyber Attacks Can Count as Acts of War , page

www.foxnews.com...
and
online.wsj.com...

The Pentagon has concluded that computer sabotage coming from another country can constitute an act of war, a finding that for the first time opens the door for the U.S. to respond using traditional military force.

Looks like we're going to war with China real soon.

reply to post by Advantage

---

Great. I agree with you, China it is, then by the world?

Jamie.

Originally posted by pandapowerjamie
reply to post by Advantage

---

Great. I agree with you, China it is, then by the world?

Jamie.

WOW.. oughtto read the second article..
online.wsj.com...


I dont like all this new fangled technological mechanized cyber war hoo-haw.

Id read that Lockheed was recently hacked too.. its obvious this is a problem, but maybe hardening our systems would make more sense than just saying we reserve the right to declare war if there is any govt sponsored hacking/cyberattacking?
Then again. I really dont know all of the ins and outs of hardening, security, etc concerning the power grids and gov/mil/etc computer systems. Id imagine this would effect everything from the Generals streaming porn channel to our missile systems and satellites. Sort of why I put this up.. to hear what others knew or thought.

reply to post by Advantage

---

The attack on Lockheed was a joke, it didn't accomplish anything.

But that doesn't mean it wont be used as an example to try and tighten up the reins of internet use.

Originally posted by GringoViejo
reply to post by Advantage

---

The attack on Lockheed was a joke, it didn't accomplish anything.

But that doesn't mean it wont be used as an example to try and tighten up the reins of internet use.

edit on 31-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

Of course no data was compromised.. thats not the point. It points out vulnerabilities that shouldnt be there in the first place.

From the above article... it isnt talking about a kid hacking in for lulz..

The report will also spark a debate over a range of sensitive issues the Pentagon left unaddressed, including whether the U.S. can ever be certain about an attack's origin, and how to define when computer sabotage is serious enough to constitute an act of war. These questions have already been a topic of dispute within the military. One idea gaining momentum at the Pentagon is the notion of "equivalence." If a cyber attack produces the death, damage, destruction or high-level disruption that a traditional military attack would cause, then it would be a candidate for a "use of force" consideration, which could merit retaliation.

reply to post by Advantage

---

That's where we find ourselves in an area that's less black and white. We would first have to assume that these vulnerabilities were unknown. The systems that were "hacked" weren't important enough to have any real protection.

As a former Lockheed employee, I can tell you this is not the first time Lockheed has been "hacked." That's why i said in another thread that anything of any real importance has been safe from the threat of computers for a long time. However, this is the first time that the media has covered the subject with such vigor. That's what is *odd* to me about the situation, and made "odder" by the pentagons recent finding that you posted.

That's just my opinion.

Originally posted by GringoViejo
reply to post by Advantage

---

That's where we find ourselves in an area that's less black and white. We would first have to assume that these vulnerabilities were unknown. The systems that were "hacked" weren't important enough to have any real protection.

As a former Lockheed employee, I can tell you this is not the first time Lockheed has been "hacked." That's why i said in another thread that anything of any real importance has been safe from the threat of computers for a long time. However, this is the first time that the media has covered the subject with such vigor. That's what is *odd* to me about the situation, and made "odder" by the pentagons recent finding that you posted.

That's just my opinion.

edit on 31-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

LOL! Not everyone is on the outside, most here know my husband and I have been attached for 20+ yrs to the DoD and other than his active duty, he has worked for everyone from Booz to others. Its been well known, as you should know, that even the pentagon itself was attacked. There are a BUNCH of DoD and contractors here on ATS and its discussed often..
The media has been covering this pretty darned vigorously since 2008 when that drive was used to hack and uploaded junk to central command in the Middle East. Just look up Operation Buckshot Yankee... and why it was done. This last one was vigorous on Lockheed. The difference was obviously that it was being thwarted real time rather than discovered later. Even on sipr and nipr.. junk networks IMO and contrary to popular ATS belief .. they cant patch the crap fast enough it has so many holes and vulnerabilities. The only thing Im waiting for is to hear a peep about HAP being infiltrated.. and thats when this new idea form the pent will be rolled out on a red carpet Id think.

reply to post by Advantage

---

True, I just think the most likely result will be more legislation on our "rights" regarding internet usage before its used to start a real war. But it does seem like there will be a green light now. I imagine we'll be rather selective though

The only thing Im waiting for is to hear a peep about HAP being infiltrated.. and thats when this new idea form the pent will be rolled out on a red carpet Id think.

By the way, I wasn't trying to "talk down" to you or anything, it's just weird to me how much Lockheed's name is being reported as if its the most "important" contractor.Just because were one of the biggest, doesn't were themost important or have the most "sensitive" info, Know what I mean

Originally posted by Advantage
www.foxnews.com...
and
online.wsj.com...

The Pentagon has concluded that computer sabotage coming from another country can constitute an act of war, a finding that for the first time opens the door for the U.S. to respond using traditional military force.

Looks like we're going to war with China real soon.

edit on 31-5-2011 by Advantage because: added another link

Note the quote reads traditional military force. Luckily that seems like a more appropriate response than from Michelle Bachman's assertion from a year ago:

Bachmann advocates nuclear response to Cyber-Attack

“So if in fact there is a nation who is compliant with all the rules ahead of time…if they fire against the United States, a biological weapon, a chemical weapon, or maybe a cyber attack, then we aren’t going to be firing back with nuclear weapons…doesn’t that make us all feel safe?”

newsgroups.derkeiler.com...

OMG Facebook is down, let's nuke somebody. GOD helps us all.

/MD

While we were Distracted with Gay Marriage news This happend today
  Posted 19 days ago with 81 member flags

People are marching in the streets all over Quebec
  Posted 4 days ago with 72 member flags

Critical Mass Has Arrived: Fast & Furious Scandal - Dems Join With GOP
  Posted 17 days ago with 32 member flags

Breaking: Ron Paul to end active campaigning - cnn
  Posted 14 days ago with 26 member flags

President Obama Affirms His Support for Same Sex Marriage
  Posted 19 days ago with 24 member flags

Anon has released 1.7 GB of files....
  Posted 7 days ago with 24 member flags

Police Tasings Might Finally Be Ruled Brutality
  Posted 13 days ago with 23 member flags

US judge blocks indefinite detention of Americans
  Posted 12 days ago with 21 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: