SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow3196
A cyberattack could wreak destruction comparable to a nuclear weapon
People around the world may be worried about nuclear tensions rising, but I think they're missing the fact that a major cyberattack could be just as damaging—and hackers are already laying the groundwork.
With the U.S. and Russia pulling out of a key nuclear weapons pact—and beginning to develop new nuclear weapons—plus Iran tensions and North Korea again test-launching missiles, the global threat to civilization is high. Some fear a new nuclear arms race.
That threat is serious—but another could be as serious, and is less visible to the public. So far, most of the well-known hacking incidents, even those with foreign government backing, have done little more than steal data. Unfortunately, there are signs that hackers have placed malicious software inside U.S. power and water systems, where it's lying in wait, ready to be triggered. The U.S. military has also reportedly penetrated the computers that control Russian electrical systems.
As someone who studies cybersecurity and information warfare, I'm concerned that a cyberattack with widespread impact, an intrusion in one area that spreads to others or a combination of lots of smaller attacks, could cause significant damage, including mass injury and death rivaling the death toll of a nuclear weapon.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday August 21 2019, @01:55PM (1 child)
First rule: there are no rules.
Whatever doctrine or policy or pattern of established behavior anybody has established, all that happens when it is broken is that you lessen your predictability / the "value of your word."
When it comes to slinging nukes, the value of anybody's word is about 0. Are we going to sling nukes in response to a chemical / biological attack? Sling 'em at who, how fast, based on whose standard of evidence, etc.?
Case by case - if slinging a nuke will make the world a better place for the nukeslinger after it's done, it's gonna happen. Hasn't been the case since Nagasaki, and the more actors who have nukes, the less likely the world is going to be a better place for them after a nuke has been unleashed on "enemy territory".
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday August 24 2019, @01:48AM
Too much predictability is a dangerous liability in the MAD strategy. The foe knows how far they can go before it triggers a response. Too little can be similarly lethal, since the foe doesn't know if they can survive (or can hope you won't follow through on certain fundamental threats required by the MAD strategy). But there is a happy medium where one has enough predictability to encourage others to play by basic, if very ruthless rules, but not enough that foes are willing to push.