It is not the norm for corporations to be the focal point of a war fought between nation states, but the threats of today place us in exactly that situation. The reason these threats jointly implicate the public and private sector is that the “cyber domain” is under attack by an organized public/private sector threat, and until we recognize that fact and address it, we will continue to fail to protect it.
The truth is that unless corporate America—the private sector–works with the public sector, we may not stop a cyber event that could be as destructive as Pearl Harbor or 9/11. This post is the first in a series of posts that will examine the nature of the threat we are facing, offer guidance about how companies can effectively and properly reduce the threat, and also illustrate the other business benefits of addressing these issues.
The Threat.
The Internet as we know it started as a public sector project that quickly morphed into what it is today—a large, interconnected network connecting an unimaginable number of different devices that are both public and private sector, which never turns off. While in the past people imagined “cyberspace” as simply just a series of websites, those days are long gone. Today, with the number of devices that are constantly connected to the world-wide network that is the Internet, the “cyber domain” includes a number of different computers, including those that control our financial system, critical infrastructure, as well as a variety of other devices in any number of different industries. These devices are central to our everyday existence, particularly when one includes mobile devices, as well as the ever increasing number of control devices that are networked. Since this “always on” world of connectivity places the resources of the United States, both public and private sector, on the same global network as those of nations and others who seek to do us harm, you cannot “raise the drawbridge” in today’s world of cyber attack—if you are part of the cyber domain, you are constantly open to potential attack.
And the threat we face in the cyber domain is no longer the lone 15 year old trying to boost his hacker street cred by hacking the government—it is now an organized, often well-funded, effort to systematically damage our economy or our nation directly. The way these groups work are to find and exploit an information imbalance and create an asymmetric threat.
An information imbalance is a situation where one side of a conflict has superior information regarding the weaknesses of the other. If that superior information relates to the weakness of another party, it can then be used to create an asymmetric threat, which is a threat that is targeted to, and exploits, another’s weaknesses.
The best example of this is 9/11, contrasted with Pearl Harbor. Pearl Harbor involved an organized, but symmetric threat. It was the Japanese Military attacking another nation state’s military. And while Japan exploited an information imbalance, it was a fight between combatants with roughly equal resources. For 9/11, Al Qaeda did not need their own army or air force, in fact, they didn’t need organized military. They simply needed utility knives (perhaps even box cutters), training, and more importantly, information about how our system of air travel worked. By creating this information imbalance, they were able to perpetrate a devastating asymmetric attack on the United States.
The lesson of 9/11 was not lost on the public sector—it realized the nature of the threat and has taken steps to address it, and one need only examine recent Executive Orders, and the words of General Keith Alexander, the Director of the National Security Agency, and a recent speech by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to see this. In 2005 President Bush issued Executive Order 13388 “Further Strengthening the Sharing of Terrorism Information to Protect Americans“, with the goal of giving information sharing of terrorism information among key stakeholders, including the public and private sector. In 2010 President Obama reaffirmed the need for public sector and private sector cooperation, and information sharing, to address cyber security concerns when it issued Executive Order 13549, “Classified National Security Information Program for State, Local, Tribal, and Private Sector Entities.” A detailed examination of these Executive Orders are beyond the scope of the post, but the important point is that the Executive Branch recognizes the need for public and private sector cooperation and information sharing.
These views were also recently reiterated by General Alexander, when he spoke to the largest hacker convention—DEF CON, and asked for their help:
We as a global society are extremely vulnerable and at risk for a catastrophic cyber event. Global society needs the best and brightest to help secure our most valued resources in cyberspace: our intellectual property, our critical infrastructure and our privacy. DEF CON has an important place in computer security. It taps into a broad range of talent and provides an unprecedented diversity of experiences and expertise to solve tough problems. The hacker community and USG cyber community share some core values: we both see the Internet as an immensely positive force; we both believe information increases in value by sharing; we both respect protection of privacy and civil liberties; we both believe in the need for oversight that fosters innovation, doesn’t pick winners and losers, and retains freedom and flexibility; we both oppose malicious and criminal behavior. We should build on this common ground because we have a shared responsibility to secure cyberspace.
Moreover, in a recent presentation, Secretary Panetta illustrated the true nature of the threat—state sponsored activity that is increasing in intensity and, with the potential to disrupt to our way of life. The video is below, but in discussing the nature of state-sponsored activity, he was clear. “A cyber attack perpetrated by nation states or violent extremist groups could be as destructive as the terrorist attack on 9/11,” and Panetta also believed that “Such a destructive cyber terrorist attack could virtually paralyze the nation.” Panetta continued, “We know of specific instances where intruders have successfully gained access to these control systems,” and he also stated that “We also know they are seeking to create advanced tools to attack those systems and cause panic, destruction and even loss of life.” A link to the video can be found here.
The critical point is that the examples Secretary Panetta uses are not attacks on DoD, or other public sector resources—they are attacks on the financial institutions and energy sector—by the government resources of another nation state.
And this threat is not limited to the financial or energy industry. If you are a group seeking to do us harm, why attempt to detonate a WMD, when you instead can attempt to hack a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) device that controls a water supply? Or why not attempt to disrupt the medical services in a large area by attacking the systems of a large hospital chain, or even a major health insurer. This can be done by a direct attack on the company, or by an attack on a company that is part of the chain of delivery of the necessary product or service. As a result, the threats are nearly endless and span a multitude of businesses that are not just in the energy or financial sectors.
In sum, as the physical war in the Middle East winds down, we now face a new, more diffused threat—organized well-funded, attacks by entities that are state sponsored or part of organized crime networks. These actors seek to create information advantages that can be turned into asymmetric threats, and these threats are a clear and present danger to our society.
How can the private sector protect itself from an organized, well-funded, public sector threat? By organizing, and funding a solution that includes the public sector in the United States. This can be done through Information Superiority, and increased information sharing. The next Lares Institute blog post will explore how the private sector can implement these strategies to better manage these critical risks.