Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is following up previous warnings of cyberattacks that could cripple the country. It seems as if he is the only person in America that is concerned.
We have written about the possibility of an electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) attack against the US and how it would devastate our way of life and these cyberattacks are on the same level. We have become so dependent on computers that a strike at any one major sector of the economy could have major impacts on our lives as the effects would cascade through the country. For example, an attack on the electric grid could cause outages that would make the 2004 one day outage (most of the eastern part of the country was knocked out by a mechanical failure), look like a blip on the screen. We could be shut down for weeks.
The danger we see with either of an EMP or a cyberattack is that we are not prepared for either. We have no backup plans. Within days, people would run out of fuel, water and food which would cause major panics throughout the country. If it went on for an extended period, say a month, there could be thousands, if not millions dying of starvation. It would be even worse if the event occurred in the winter when being able to heat homes would become even more imperative.
Yet our government has no plans and most people who have established some sort of "emergency stockpile" might not be able to protect it and themselves from those who would do anything to get a meal or fuel their car or heat their home. Isn't it the job of government to protect its people from "enemies foreign and domestic?" If so, they fail again.
This is not an issue that will go away with the election of a new President and Congress, it is going to be a permanent threat for the foreseeable future. Our leaders must understand the concerns that Secretary Panetta expresses and then take steps to institute plans to protect us. Otherwise, we only invite some rogue country or despot to take us down without firing a shot!
Conservative Tom
We have written about the possibility of an electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) attack against the US and how it would devastate our way of life and these cyberattacks are on the same level. We have become so dependent on computers that a strike at any one major sector of the economy could have major impacts on our lives as the effects would cascade through the country. For example, an attack on the electric grid could cause outages that would make the 2004 one day outage (most of the eastern part of the country was knocked out by a mechanical failure), look like a blip on the screen. We could be shut down for weeks.
The danger we see with either of an EMP or a cyberattack is that we are not prepared for either. We have no backup plans. Within days, people would run out of fuel, water and food which would cause major panics throughout the country. If it went on for an extended period, say a month, there could be thousands, if not millions dying of starvation. It would be even worse if the event occurred in the winter when being able to heat homes would become even more imperative.
Yet our government has no plans and most people who have established some sort of "emergency stockpile" might not be able to protect it and themselves from those who would do anything to get a meal or fuel their car or heat their home. Isn't it the job of government to protect its people from "enemies foreign and domestic?" If so, they fail again.
This is not an issue that will go away with the election of a new President and Congress, it is going to be a permanent threat for the foreseeable future. Our leaders must understand the concerns that Secretary Panetta expresses and then take steps to institute plans to protect us. Otherwise, we only invite some rogue country or despot to take us down without firing a shot!
Conservative Tom
DEFENSE SECRETARY: CYBERATTACKS HAVE ‘THE POTENTIAL FOR ANOTHER PEARL HARBOR’
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta speaks with a congressional subcommittee on budget cuts Wednesday. (Photo: DOD/Glenn Fawcett)
In pleading with Congress Wednesday against automatic defense budget cuts, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta also warned of another crippling situation like Pearl Harbor. It won’t come in the form of bombers and torpedo planes though but as hackers and worms of the cyber variety with the ability to cripple U.S. infrastructure.
CNS News reports Panetta saying that those with the capability to launch a cyberattack would be able to “paralyze” the United States. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked Panetta to clarify:
“You said something that just kind of went over everybody’s head, I think, that there’s a Pearl Harbor in the making here. You’re talking about shutting down financial systems, releasing chemicals from chemical plants, releasing water from dams, shutting down power systems that can affect the very survival of the nation. What’s the likelihood in the next five years that one of these major events will occur?”
To this Panetta responded simply by saying that the “technological capability” to send our country into a mode like that of Pearl Harbor in a surprise attack is already available now. Panetta’s references to “the next Pearl Harbor” echo sentiments he shared last year with regard to cyberattacks, according to CNS news.
In June 2011, while being confirmed as Defense Secretary, Panetta said to the panel, “The next Pearl Harbor we confront could very well be a cyber attack that cripples our power systems, our grid, our security systems, our financial systems, our governmental systems.”
Continuing to probe on Wednesday, Graham asked about the risk level, which Panetta said was high, especially as the technology develops and the “will” to use it becomes more apparent.
“I’m very concerned that the potential in cyber to be able to cripple our power grid, to be able to cripple our government systems, to be able to cripple our financial system would virtually paralyze this country,” Panetta said. “And, as far as I’m concerned, that represents the potential for another Pearl Harbor as far as the kind of attack that we could be the target of using cyber.”
Those in the United States — both the government and private industry — are already the targets of thousands of attacks per day, according to Panetta. With that, he notes the importance of improving safety of systems in not only the defense sector but the private sector as well.
Earlier this year, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing Protection Act (CISPA) was introduced as proposed legislation that would put in place the infrastructure for private companies to share information with the federal government on the Internet to help prevent electronic attacks from cybercriminals, foreign governments and terrorists. The Cybersecurity Act of 2012, sponsored by Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) was mentioned as well. At this point, CISPA has been passed with bipartisan support in the House and still awaits a Senate vote. The Cybersecurity Act of 2012 has not yet been voted upon.
CISPA has been met with some backlash with those against the proposed legislation saying the language is overly broad and they fear violations of the anti-trust law by the government.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey weighed in his support of CISPA during Wednesday’s hearing but also said the military is looking to develop “rules of engagement” to respond to cyberattacks and threats, according to CNS News.
Watch CNS’ footage of the dialogue here:
The Pentagon faces cuts of about $500 billion in projected spending over 10 years on top of the $492 billion that President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans already agreed to in last summer’s deficit-cutting budget.
Dempsey said the cuts would mean fewer troops, the possible cancellation of major weapons and the disruption of operations around the world.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
My apologies for asking an off-topic question, but I have been waiting for you to post something about the Egyptian presidential election.
ReplyDeleteThe question: If it is true that Shafiq and the military are in cahoots to rig the election, would you nevertheless prefer that Ahmed Shafiq be president even though he lost in a fair and free democratic election?
--David
Maybe some article like this could be the start of a discussion here....
ReplyDeletehttp://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/06/egyptian-military-hosni-mubarak-election-muslim-brotherhood-morsi-soft-shafik-coup.html
--David
"The announcement of the president was supposed to be the end of Egypt's post-uprising transition to democracy. However the military made a series of last minute moves that stripped the office of president of most of its major powers and kept those powers concentrated in the hands of the military. A court ruling a few days before that dissolved the freely elected parliament that was dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood."
ReplyDeletehttp://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/06/24/egypt-braces-for-announcement-president/
---------
So, the military has allowed to Muslim Brotherhood to hold the political office, but have stripped the powers of the president. It looks to me as if Egypt will remain essentially a military dictatorship thinly veiled as a "democracy."
--David