Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 214 posts

Re: NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

#201

Post by asdfman123 »

repolfx wrote: post #198
asdfman123 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it be possible to build the next generation of technology to be much less hackable? Right now we're all pretty dumb about cybersecurity, but if plays a major hand in shaping human events even stodgy Pentagon types might start taking things like air gaps and not writing your passwords out on a sticky note more seriously.

It's possible . People wouldn't like it. Mandate that all software - everywhere - is written in Java or Rust with no unsafe blocks (but, oops, you can't realistically do that in Rust). Make it illegal to use web apps to administer infrastructure. Desktop GUIs all the way (no XSS there ...). Then mandate that this infrastructure can't be administered from Windows, but only some locked down new OS that required iOS sty…

It seems like then we should be doing all of that already for all military applications since we're considering hackability to be such a huge issue.

People write insecure applications because of all the priorities they are given by management, security usually isn't even on the list. Perhaps we'll get to the point of real maturity and have security experts working in every department, and operations with real security. Maybe.

Re: NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

#202

Post by asdfman123 »

hos234 wrote: post #172
asdfman123 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, as far as I see it, all this scary new data on our lives is mainly useful so companies can show us marginally better ads. I mean, I'm sure there's a lot more to it and it's more complicated than that, but I think we'll eventually adjust fine to the big-data world we increasingly find ourselves in.

Keep an eye open for more Trump and Brexit style events. You don't need a nation state to trigger them. That's the future of war.

For all the scandal, they were just really good identifying people who could be convinced and doing their best to convince them.

Re: NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

#203

Post by ryacko »

hos234 wrote: post #172
asdfman123 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, as far as I see it, all this scary new data on our lives is mainly useful so companies can show us marginally better ads. I mean, I'm sure there's a lot more to it and it's more complicated than that, but I think we'll eventually adjust fine to the big-data world we increasingly find ourselves in.

Keep an eye open for more Trump and Brexit style events. You don't need a nation state to trigger them. That's the future of war.

The only thing those two events have in common is immigration? Are you saying that there is a war between people who want immigration and those who do not, or something?

Re: NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

#204

Post by ryacko »

motohagiography wrote: post #129

We could call this historical period a great dis-integration where the consensus that formed the equilibrium of the last 60 years has been disrupted by tech, and we're looking at a period of volatility before reaching a new equilibrium. I've argued before that U.S. critical infrastructure vulnerability will prevent it from intervening in Taiwan and Hong Kong. Its lack of a strong homeland defensive posture on infrast…

>The US isn't going to risk a dam flooding or a long term grid failure over a distant minor ally.

People are irrational. For the sake of transgressing a minor boundary, wars have occurred, even if the boundary has no strategic value. Suppose there are patrols into barren hinterland, that could still cause a war, even though the lands could not support permanent habitation.

It is theorized that Germany started WWI because of growing popular support for the socialist party.

Re: NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

#205

Post by thinkmassive »

mr_overalls wrote: post #189
thinkmassive wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A feudal oligarchy.

Oligarchy, I'll buy. But why feudal, specifically?

The nobility provides digital “land” to the serfs in exchange for data, time (being an audience), and sometimes money. The serfs choose where to spend their resources, and by doing so they increase the value of the lands while also becoming more reliant on them (less likely to migrate, more likely to come to their defense).

Edit: this focuses on the commoners side, and I agree with what JetSpiegel said regarding the top-level aspect.

Re: NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

#206

Post by repolfx »

mikewarot wrote: post #176

It is possible to make secure operating systems, doing so has been discouraged since the demise of multics. A sense of futility is now endemic to the Information Technology community, because they think such a thing is impossible, they won't even try, and actively deride anyone who states otherwise. The security research required to build multi-level secure operating systems was completed in response to information p…

Capability based security isn't a panacea by itself. It suffers from the confused deputy problem, for one. If subsystem A has a capability to read every file, and exports an API that takes a file path and opens it, returning the opened fd, then you lose.

"But that's a stupid/buggy app!" you cry. Well yes, but that's a simplified scenario. Confused deputies that can be tricked into using their own privileges on the behalf of others are a common security bug pattern in pure cap systems.

That said, I agree with you it's possible to do vastly better than we do today. Security isn't a priority. If it was nobody would use HTML for user interfaces, but they do because installing apps is inconvenient and HTML is nicely vendor neutral. It's also free. Convenience and price win out over security every time.

Re: NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

#207

Post by nickpinkston »

asdfman123 wrote: post #133
sailfast wrote: post #85

This opinion piece is borderline screed and I'm not sure what to make of it. Part of the piece is "OMG China!" with some pretty dubious assumptions, especially things like their GDP being bigger than the US is an existential threat. "The world is scary" is not a narrative I will respond to. Of course it is - it's bloody frightening. But have you tried framing the discussion in a way that is not so warfare and zero su…

> have you tried framing the discussion in a way that is not so warfare and zero sum-focused but rather collaborative? We live in extraordinarily peaceful times. Those have cropped up throughout history. They have never lasted because balances of power shift. We are not at the end of history. We are a footnote in a history book written a thousand years from now. I hope you're right, though.

You're optimistic about there being history in 1000 years, or hell - even people to read it!

Re: NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

#208

Post by nickpinkston »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #150
asdfman123 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> have you tried framing the discussion in a way that is not so warfare and zero sum-focused but rather collaborative? We live in extraordinarily peaceful times. Those have cropped up throughout history. They have never lasted because balances of power shift. We are not at the end of history. We are a footnote in a history book written a thousand years from now. I hope you're right, though.

>They have never lasted because balances of power shift This is often the result of one side claiming everyone is about to attack them and massively increasing their military budget.

The "Thucydides Trap"

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/06/09/the-thucydides-trap/

Re: NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

#209

Post by mirimir »

hos234 wrote: post #70
HenryKissinger wrote: post #11

> There are four key implications of this revolution that policymakers in the national security sector will need to address: > The first is that the unprecedented scale and pace of technological change will outstrip our ability to effectively adapt to it. Second, we will be in a world of ceaseless and pervasive cyberinsecurity and cyberconflict against nation-states, businesses and individuals. Third, the flood of da…

Translates to - We don't know what we are doing or why but please keep funding us. Henry Kissinger pls talk to Kim Kardashian, and the marketing departments of the world. They will have better ideas on how to fight the next war than anyone who has traditionally fought one. What ever you do don't talk to techies. As Chinese Intelligence is showcasing in Hong Kong, building giant machinery that vacuums up oceans of dat…

Yeah.

We need all the data there is. Plus enough AI to analyze it, and provide actionable intelligence. So you need to give us lots of money. Really, lots. And trust us. A lot.

Re: NSA Official: We Need to Prepare for the Future of War

#210

Post by sliken »

smolder wrote: post #167
SiempreViernes wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Governments will become less and less powerful. And why would governments accept this?

They won't. They'll build costly surveillance into everything and attack individual liberties for the sake of social control. They'll sap potential for positive disruption, out of paranoia, and ironically ensure the unsteerable inertia of existing institutions takes us all off a cliff.

Or they could say put a limit how big cooperation can be an enforce restrictions on each market. Don't let sprint and t-mobile merge for instance. Force companies over a certain market cap (say $10B) to split.

That way governments could stay in control without stomping on the liberties and freedom of it's citizens.... after all the government is there at the service of the people... right?

Post reply on HN