Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
nytimes.com
Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
1–10 of 16 posts
Re: Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
#2"While antivirus companies might catch some, he says, only an international treaty that would ban militaries and spy agencies from making viruses will truly solve the problem. "
I really doubt that it would stop the problem. Viruses would still be made by the militaries/agencies.
Re: Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
#3Who else thinks that the world needs an international arms control treaty to forbid cyber weapons?
Especially Americans need to get behind this. Right now Americans have a perceived advantage in cyber weapon technology and are thus opposed to cyber arms control.
Re: Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
#4Who else thinks that the world needs an international arms control treaty to forbid cyber weapons? Especially Americans need to get behind this. Right now Americans have a perceived advantage in cyber weapon technology and are thus opposed to cyber arms control.
I'm not opposed to this at all but I question how exactly enforcement would/can work. We don't know with 100% accuracy who was responsible for Stuxnet, Flame, Operation Aurora, etc and especially with code, it is going to be exceedingly difficult in most cases to get evidence such that blame can be leveled with any certainty.
Re: Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
#5Prognostications? From this Kaspersky?
http://macdailynews.com/2011/06/17/kaspersky-cto-apple-shoul...
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6173682-7.html
http://www.macworld.com/article/1150904/iphone_prediction.ht...
He (and his company) are good at getting in the news, but I'm kind of tuned him out from actual commentary on computer security.
Re: Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
#6Who else thinks that the world needs an international arms control treaty to forbid cyber weapons? Especially Americans need to get behind this. Right now Americans have a perceived advantage in cyber weapon technology and are thus opposed to cyber arms control.
I'm not opposed to this at all but I question how exactly enforcement would/can work. We don't know with 100% accuracy who was responsible for Stuxnet, Flame, Operation Aurora, etc and especially with code, it is going to be exceedingly difficult in most cases to get evidence such that blame can be leveled with any certainty.
Furthermore unlike nukes it is completely impossible to verify that a country dosen't have cyber weapons. Cyber weapons can be hidden in someone's shoe, you can't do that with a nuclear arsenal.
Re: Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
#7The screenshot of the Flame program in the article shows Lua code. http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/06/04/business/jpVI...
Re: Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
#8Who else thinks that the world needs an international arms control treaty to forbid cyber weapons? Especially Americans need to get behind this. Right now Americans have a perceived advantage in cyber weapon technology and are thus opposed to cyber arms control.
Never going to happen.
Re: Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
#9The obvious question, the true cost of MS Windows is what again, you saving money?
Thi sis why ever Cyber Security CZar leaves Washington because the real problem is not security its MS Windows being unsecured by default and design.
Re: Cyberweapon Warning From Eugene Kaspersky
#10> When Eugene Kaspersky (...) discovered the Flame virus (...), he recognized it as a technologically sophisticated virus that only a government could create.
How does one know whether a virus can only have been produced by a gvt or not?