SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
President Trump Relaxes US Cyber-Attacks Rules:
President Trump has signed an order relaxing rules around the use of cyber-weapons, the Wall Street Journal reports.[*]
It is a reversal of guidelines, drawn up under President Obama, which required a large number of federal agencies to be involved in any decision to launch a cyber-attack.
[...] The US administration is under pressure to deal with cyber-threats, amid growing concerns that state-sponsored hacks could hit critical infrastructure.
Prof Alan Woodward, a computer scientist at the University of Surrey, told the BBC: "We are in a era when certain governments are acting aggressively in cyber-space, and that is rightly condemned by governments such as that in the US.
"To respond in kind is not necessarily the way to de-escalate the situation."
He added: "You wouldn't allow a pre-emptive physical attack without thorough analysis and approval at the highest levels, so why would cyber-attacks be any different?"
[*] Paywalled.
Let's hope extreme care is taken to identify the actual source of an attack, rather than the apparent source.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @04:49PM (7 children)
This won't change the decisions. It just cuts down on useless bureaucrats getting payed to produce TPS reports. By having fewer useless bureaucrats involved, we save money and reduce leaks.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @05:37PM
Every bit of code used for these "cyber attacks" should be leaked. Bugs should be fixed, not exploited. If you want to attack, man up and send bombs.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Friday August 17 2018, @05:54PM
The bully likes to look around and get his friends to nod, as he punches the weak.
Turns out that you don't need informed consent, when you have unshakeable support from outside.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @06:20PM (4 children)
Piss off you liberty hating dip.
Oversight of war activities is one area where you should not try to minimize.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 18 2018, @12:08AM (3 children)
As they said in World War II: "Loose lips sink ships"
The more people you tell, the more likely that somebody will leak it out to the enemy.
It's not as if the oversight is valuable anyway. Nobody is going to say "no", which is I think what you're hoping for. They will just collect a paycheck.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 18 2018, @12:13AM (2 children)
Try providing some citations instead of blind belief. Ships are a different scenario since they would stop in various ports and sailors would get drunk and might let loose some important information. That little quip doesn't really apply to the oversight committee sitting comfortably in Virginia or wherever. There is plenty of waste in government, your desire sits at the bottom of the list.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 18 2018, @03:54AM
Comfortable in Virginia, some random shipyard worker or Pentagon typist mentions...
a. the armor strength or coverage
b. the method of choosing routes
c. the rate of turn or maximum speed
d. any hint about arrival or departure time
...and that gives an enemy an edge in battle. The problem here is the same.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 24 2018, @02:18AM
You're off base with your assumptions about drunk sailors in foreign ports. That "loose lips" thing was aimed more at people at home, and REMF types. The squids aboard ship weren't likely to be telling the local whores where they were going next, for two reasons. First, the lowly enlisted personnel seldom knew where they were going - IF the officers knew. Second, when it's YOUR ASS on the line, you're not going to share secrets with strangers.
Loose lips AT HOME sank more ships than loose lips aboard ship.