Cyber Scene #18 - Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

Image removed.Cyber Scene #18

Thinking Globally

Tech Olympiad: Higher, Faster and Perhaps Lower Poles (and others) in the Tent

The Economist gives a "high five" salute to 5G discussions from the U.S White House as the future of the internet—centralization or decentralization—enters a new realm. China has certainly left its mark on this issue as it has harnessed its own and foreign tech participants in its homeland. The U.S., as noted in the Economist's "Next-generation thinking" , went through a decentralization of the telecom industry in 1984 when MA Bell was forced to put her children up for adoption. Now, this subject, in the U.S. and elsewhere, surfaces again. The Economist's take is that the White House National Security Council 5G proposal that the U.S. create and run the next gen mobile network is not such a bad idea. The proviso would be that firms lease capacity to create networks without having to build them just as firms use smartphones and app stores to reach their clientele. This would lead to an even more vibrant IOT. (Disclaimer: The Economist is a stellar, balanced British-based publication in business since Abe Lincoln was writing lampoons and dealing with new in-laws (1843); it is not a White House instrument.)

Former Intelligence Community Senior Alum (State/INR, CIA, National Intelligence Council Deputy), author of "Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy" and Jeopardy Grand Champion Dr. Mark Lowenthal endorses the creation of a new (a second) internet--one that cannot be tampered with by Best Buy purchases capable of an OPM-level hack. In response to questions as to how to secure what we have might be, he said (Sarasota Institute for Lifetime Learning, 10 February 2018, by subscription) that the U.S. is still "working its way" through deterrence.

Several past Cyber Scenes have discussed this unimagined expansion and application of the internet not envisaged by DARPA or Al Gore. On a grand scale, the security and privacy issues addressed by former NSA Deputy Director Chris Inglis (see Cyber Scene #17) have also preoccupied the tech ramp-up to the Olympics. Competing nations are mostly playing defense while some superstars, including the nation uninvited, are reportedly on offense. The New York Times wrote on 8 February 2018 (Nicole Perlroth, "Despite Security Being on Alert...") of a Homeland Security warning to Americans that cybercriminals were likely targeting the games. The Olympic Committee's Security Command Center including security experts from around the world was monitoring North Korean threats and network probes in Pyeongchang, South Korea. Russians had reportedly penetrated Olympic-related organizations months earlier. Over 300 related computer systems were hit and many compromised, according to McAfee's statement cited in the Times article. Further, a McAfee official added that these hacks were well organized, well resourced, and bore the "hallmarks of a nation state." In January 2018, the Russian-backed cyberespionage group Fancy Bear posted emails from the International Luge Federation and the International Olympic Committee accounts as well as attacked the International Ice Hockey, Ski, and Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federations and the International Biathlon Union. South Korea reportedly has tens of thousands of security personnel including cybersecurity analysts as well as 50,000 soldiers to protect the Olympics. Moreover, each participating nation has its own security delegation on the ground. And at least one nation not officially represented is there in spirit even if not there demonstrably in body.

As for China, the Economist (17 Feb Schumpeter) looks at how the Sino-American tech race is going and who is expected to win, particularly now that "techtonic" plates are shifting. The editorialist "Schumpeter" dispels the notion that the U.S. can continue to pat itself on the back regarding the enduring nature of its tech lead. After three rounds, the author maintains that in the fourth stage China is reaching parity and the age of "imperial arrogance" is about to end. He examines, through U.S. (Bloomberg, Goldman Sachs, McKinsey, etc) as well as Chinese sources, 3,000 listed global tech firms 226 "unicorns" (unlisted startups worth over $1 billion) and Huawei. After probing and poking at each country's tech weaknesses, he notes that the Chinese scientists are improving at breakthrough innovation reaching 89% of the U.S. achievement. He warns Silicon Valley: "It is time to get paranoid." He concludes dramatically by noting that in the past, U.S. tech execs could see the world's cutting edge by walking out the door." Now they must fly to China, too. Let's hope the airports still work."

Acting Locally

"Playing to the Edge" (Michael Hayden 2016 work on intelligence and terrorism) evolves to "Computing to the Edge" (Economist 20 Jan 2018 "Life on the edge”) where cloud computing emerges from centralization to local networks and devices. This is seen as a significant reversal pendulum swing which is projected to lead to upheaval and a big tech food fight as the best of the big athletes fight for control of the Internet of Things (IOT). Microsoft, for example, has replaced its motto "mobile first, cloud first" with "intelligent cloud, intelligent edge." Like Olympic hockey players, what goes around, comes around, since the pendulum has reversed direction before in computer adolescent years. But economics, better algorithms, and speed are creating an "increasingly moveable feast" of bits and bytes, and leads the Economist to suggest "air" replace "cloud" computing, as "it is everywhere and gives things life." And at a race pace.

National, State and Local Threats: Game On

The top U.S. intelligence officials testified before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) on 13 February 2018 to present the Intelligence Community's Annual World Threat Assessment, first in a two-hour open hearing followed by a closed one in the afternoon. The six who testified (DNI Coats, FBI Wray, CIA Pompeo, DIA Ashley, NSA Rogers and NGA Cardillo) awarded a gold first (no surprise here) to cyber, underscored by DNI Coats as he deviated in his opening statement from what his written version submitted earlier. Questions from Chair Burr, Vice Chair Warner and most other sitting SSCI members, after visiting the trails of the Korean Peninsula, China and other competitors, raced downhill to Russia and the 2018 U.S. midterm elections. While the DNI noted that "The Russians have a strategy that goes well beyond what is happening in the U.S." he added "...clearly they upped their game in 2016." Despite chastisement (think doping and the retracted Winter Olympics invitation), the Russian intrusions and successful infiltration continue uncontained. All six officials responded "yes, no change" when asked pointedly and individually by the SSCI. At the national level, Warner pointed out that Russian bots have sought to portray the Department of Justice and FBI as "infected by partisan bias"--something the SSCI, reminiscently, remarkably and admirably-- does not display (author's editorial). The New York Times (Feb 14 2018, above the fold with photos) provides a comprehensive if lengthy executive summary. Graphic learners and those who like to see democracy in action will prefer the SSCI video.

Relatedly, the Department of Justice announced on 20 February the formation of a Cybersecurity Task Force to protect the integrity of US elections. Attorney General Jeff Sessions identified its principal mission as fighting foreign interference in U.S. elections, deterring attacks on infrastructure and curbing online terrorist recruiting. This may have been prompted by recurring questions from SSCI Members to the testifiers: "Who in the US Government is in charge of Cyber Security?" DNI Coats had stated on 13 Feb that there was no plan to create a cyber czar. Unfortunately, there already is one. He just isn't on our team and his country invented czars.

The 22 Feb. 2018 view from across the Pond, "Russia's Dirty Tricks: How Putin meddles in Western democracies and why the West's response is inadequate" , however, is that France, Germany and Finland have taken some measures whereas the U.S. response is insufficient. In fact, in the SSCI testimony, preemptive measures to secure the integrity of the U.S. federal, state and local election process was addressed. Although countermeasures are being developed, the open testimony called attention to the fact that some elections in the U.S. start in March, which is in days, not months or years from now. Let us hope (not a plan, granted) that the closed testimony shines some positive light on viable countermeasures. Meanwhile, Twitter, Facebook and others are now combating Russian fake news regarding the NRA and the Parkland shooting from, as the Mueller investigation is revealing, the safety of St. Petersburg (Russia).

Submitted by Anonymous on