Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
berthub.eu
Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
1–10 of 286 posts
Re: Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
#2At times it's a bit difficult to read, as it seems to be a telescript of a speech. But the overall gist and main topic are one that needs much more attention sooner rather than later/never.
Re: Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
#3Author here - if you have any questions, please do let me know!
Re: Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
#4Author here - if you have any questions, please do let me know!
No questions, but as a security person, I found this to be aligned with the view of many of the people i consider to have a good pulse on the warfare side of security. You're certainly not alone in these thoughts and efforts to fix.
Re: Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
#5At times it's a bit difficult to read, as it seems to be a telescript of a speech. But the overall gist and main topic are one that needs much more attention sooner rather than later/never.
My colleagues and I submitted a similar talk/paper for a different
NCSC conference (but weren't accepted). I see that this talk by Bert
Hubert covers mostly the ground. so I am pleased, but worried about
what this take misses out.
Hubert is addressing much of the ground that lies between security and resilience.
Our emphasis is on how mitigation lies in education and autonomous systems over regulation. Not that regulation is wrong, just that it doesn't work as a stick without a carrot. We also looked at timescales and how so much is already too late because of the lag-time from drafting to efficacy. And what I know from hanging out here on HN is that technologists appear hostile to regulation, but giant companies love it so long as they get to write the rules that give them more monopoly power.
Where we went wrong I think is lack of political tact. Hubert stops himself from even finishing off the remark about the quality of Microsoft products. But I don't think the real problem can be ignored for much longer. Instead, we went all-in and emphasised (as previously here [0]) that "Big Tech is the cybersecurity problem" (as Bruce Schniere recently echoed) because it pushes (in addition to highly centralised single points of failure) an irresilient "insecurity industry" that is based on protection not security.
Hubert's talk doesn't get to the key issue;
Security and protection are not the same thing.
Protection leads to dependency that ultimately erodes real security.
However "protection" is easy and profitable to sell. Real security is not.
That is ths succinct way in which it must be put.
If the intel appraisal is accurate and we are entering a serious war footing than we can have no more patience for the profitable but dangerous "insecurity industry" that gives an appearance and simulation of security, without the reality.
[0] https://techrights.org/o/2021/11/29/teaching-cybersecurity/
Re: Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
#6Author here - if you have any questions, please do let me know!
Very good. Well said and most enjoyable.
Re: Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
#7Bert is a national treasure. We need more Bert in our lives!
Re: Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
#8It does feel mad that we outsource so much of our national infrastructure maintenance to China.
When/if they invade Taiwan, how are we going to do anything when they have that sort of leverage over us? It was bad enough with Russias gas
Re: Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
#9I cannot agree more with the author’s point of view. As an illustration, many people want to use GPS for the safe positioning of trains in the European Train Control Systems. This makes the space sector happy because it justifies the expenditures incurred for putting things like Galileo in orbit. However, in a pre-war check exercise, one immediately come to the conclusion that all European trains would crawl to a stop in case the GPS is jammed or interfered with. We were not very listened to… until Ukraine.
Critical infrastructures should not depend from things that are located in space or on the other side of the planet. These are one of those things were market logic should be anticipated with regulations (we can’t wait for the next Titanic). Another point touched by the article.
Re: Cyber Security: A pre-war reality check
#10Author here - if you have any questions, please do let me know!
This is off topic, but I’m idly curious about the history of shipbuilding regulatory changes after the Titanic. Where did Brenno de Winter learn about them?