Live data from Hacker News

Hacks Raise Fear Over N.S.A.’s Hold on Cyberweapons

nytimes.com

11–20 of 116 posts

Re: Hacks Raise Fear Over N.S.A.’s Hold on Cyberweapons

#11
post #4

This is merely a taste of what is to come. When President Obama stated in December[0] that we will deliver a "proportional response" to Russian hacking at the "time and place of our own choosing", it seemed that most of the country was proud, almost gleeful at the thought that we would be striking back. I for one was mortified. We should not be escalating cyberwar, even if we do have proof of who attacked us. People…

Man's way to peace is by having a bigger gun than his neighbor.

Re: Hacks Raise Fear Over N.S.A.’s Hold on Cyberweapons

#12
post #9

Two questions 1. Why do they not simply take the weapons of a network? Maybe store it on some physical media, or a computer not networked unless it's time to take a Kim down a notch? 2. Are these "weapons" really that dastardly? Most of these common ransom-ware and viruses are easily avoided, and only succeed because of naive users. Backdoors aren't a weapon, they're there on purpose. Sniffing, spying, and logging ca…

> Most of these common ransom-ware and viruses are easily avoided, and only succeed because of naive users.

The problem is that the large majority of the users is naive.

Re: Hacks Raise Fear Over N.S.A.’s Hold on Cyberweapons

#13
post #4

This is merely a taste of what is to come. When President Obama stated in December[0] that we will deliver a "proportional response" to Russian hacking at the "time and place of our own choosing", it seemed that most of the country was proud, almost gleeful at the thought that we would be striking back. I for one was mortified. We should not be escalating cyberwar, even if we do have proof of who attacked us. People…

I don't want the NSA to become a defensive organization. I like that Iran's nuclear program is being delayed. That's not a defensive action. You don't seem to be proposing that the NSA become defensive, either. If Russia attacks us and we don't respond, that's not even defensive. That's dismantling.

A defensive response would be to inform major vendors of our own infrastructure (i.e. Microsoft, Cisco) of the gaping holes in their systems, instead of leaving them open for the world to attack.

Re: Hacks Raise Fear Over N.S.A.’s Hold on Cyberweapons

#14
Cyberwar hasn't necessarily led to the massive loss of life associated with nuclear or chemical weapons. Until that happens (or like with nuclear weapons, we can culturally show how much of a zero-sum game it is), ordinary people won't have an incentive to take action. Technically minded people may carry capital, but we're vastly outnumbered by the dwindling working class politically.

Re: Hacks Raise Fear Over N.S.A.’s Hold on Cyberweapons

#15
post #4

This is merely a taste of what is to come. When President Obama stated in December[0] that we will deliver a "proportional response" to Russian hacking at the "time and place of our own choosing", it seemed that most of the country was proud, almost gleeful at the thought that we would be striking back. I for one was mortified. We should not be escalating cyberwar, even if we do have proof of who attacked us. People…

Man's way to peace is by having a bigger gun than his neighbor.

At some point, someone will use their Bitsy Big-Boy Boomeroo, and that'll be the end of that.

Re: Hacks Raise Fear Over N.S.A.’s Hold on Cyberweapons

#16
> White House officials have deflected many questions, and responded to others by arguing that the focus should be on the attackers themselves, not the manufacturer of their weapons.

Am i to understand that if somebody would manage to steal nuclear warheads and launch them we don't hold the people who failed to protect them responsible?

Re: Hacks Raise Fear Over N.S.A.’s Hold on Cyberweapons

#17

Not trying to claim whataboutism, but I think there's an elephant in the room. The end result of the NSA saying "ok, as of today we've completely disarmed our cyberweapon stockpile and released patches for all vulnerabilities to the appropriate software companies" wouldn't be the end of cyberattacks. It would just be someone else doing them. I don't know what the real solution is. Maybe there is none.

>wouldn't be the end of cyberattacks.

This is a strawman. No one knowledgeable is saying it would create 100% security, just that it would be a net increase in the security of our infrastructure.

Re: Hacks Raise Fear Over N.S.A.’s Hold on Cyberweapons

#19

Not trying to claim whataboutism, but I think there's an elephant in the room. The end result of the NSA saying "ok, as of today we've completely disarmed our cyberweapon stockpile and released patches for all vulnerabilities to the appropriate software companies" wouldn't be the end of cyberattacks. It would just be someone else doing them. I don't know what the real solution is. Maybe there is none.

Somebody could have done that right now as well, but nobody did make them so far (or used them in any significant way that people know of).

Instead of (ab)using somebody else's mistakes to your own advantage (and possibly have it backfire) you could also tell that person about their mistakes so the whole world could benefit and there would be 1 issue less in the world to worry about.

Re: Hacks Raise Fear Over N.S.A.’s Hold on Cyberweapons

#20
post #4

This is merely a taste of what is to come. When President Obama stated in December[0] that we will deliver a "proportional response" to Russian hacking at the "time and place of our own choosing", it seemed that most of the country was proud, almost gleeful at the thought that we would be striking back. I for one was mortified. We should not be escalating cyberwar, even if we do have proof of who attacked us. People…

I don't want the NSA to become a defensive organization. I like that Iran's nuclear program is being delayed. That's not a defensive action. You don't seem to be proposing that the NSA become defensive, either. If Russia attacks us and we don't respond, that's not even defensive. That's dismantling.

so you want to live in a world where both countries don't have any power? Sounds Utopian.

Defence is only card in this game worth playing especially when it comes to infrastructure attacks.

Post reply on HN