since i am preparing a release of public version of a talk on IO i did a while ago perhaps now a good time to ask Qs regarding points in the second mail of this thread .
- what international law defines war and its distinctions with espionage , sabotage , coups or revolutions ? i'd be thankful for a link to something of that nature covering stuff related to IO/IW - if stealing things , like a bunch of cc and paypal info off some dude's win8 with some 0day is a Crime , and if by taking the exactly same steps two adversaries hurt each other , say , one with stealing loc/addr/phone/residential data of a nuclear scientist later blessed with magnet bomblets and the other one , stealing codes to render some parts of a missile defense useless while blessing the same dude with waves of missiles AND none agrees on any mutually accepted convention on warfare and all happened unannounced , how that 0day and the steps to exfiltrate the data in a supposedly simple cyber-robbery and a secret struggle between two states who hates each other to the fullest could be classified as a "civilian ill-intended tool" or "stuff" or "something else" in our crime scenario while being looked as Cyber/Electronic Weapons in the other case ? - suppose we can combine as many T-P-H Bytes as possible on some data center out there , and sophisticated math and processing behind it , which could be of help to identify who coded a duqu-type framework and follow the dude right to the contractor and make a "attribution case" , at least good for embarrassment theaters nation-states love , which part of it is "unscientific" or "emotional" ? i totally agree with you and some other fellas on "The Source" not being a Weapon or even Ammunition . it is INTELLIGENCE . raw/analyzed/verified/outdated/deceptive/smelly/secret/actionable/useless/disinfo etc . not all parts of a battle , whether between two gangs in a robbery-gone-bad or two nation-state military are in the row with "Fire" and "Shooting" materials . some are of more delicate nature and do not show smoke and flames when a trigger pulled or button pushed , even if they were named "Flame" . -mh On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Dave Dittrich <[email protected]>wrote: > Dave, > > With all due respect, I think the "cyberweapon" and "cyberwar" language > needs to stop. I urge you to not promote it. > > This kind of sloppy rhetoric conflates war (which has clear definitions > under international law) with espionage (or network exploitation) and > worse, with crime. Stealing things is NOT war. Breaking into computers is > NOT war. These are NOT weapons, unless they can clearly be shown to have > similar effects to actual weapons. > > Calling DNA a "cyberweapon," as happened in a previous post, conflates > information about biology with computer programs (is it not one) and use of > that information with an act of war (it is NOT war.) > > Seriously, this is really hurting our cause by degrading a serious topic > into unscientific, emotional, and in may cases entirely self-serving > rhetoric, rather than a serious discussion of serious issues. > > Dave (D.) > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Dave Aitel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> So what defines a Cyber Weapon is in some part of my mind, a certain >> Mojo. It's like the difference between a speech, and rhetoric. With the >> right rhetoric you can lift whole houses right off the ground. And the >> right cyber weapon can change the world. >> >> To put it into context is Robert Graham: >> http://blog.erratasec.com/2013/10/the-fifth-estate-consensual.html<http://blog.erratasec.com/2013/10/the-fifth-estate-consensual.html#.UmmFBPnkvz4> >> >> " >> But once he got the ball rolling, it started to take on a life of its >> own. That happens a lot on the Internet. >> " >> >> His claim (which is probably right) is that WikiLeaks is there to provide >> cover for Wikileaks-related hackers (aka, Assange himself) who had data >> they wanted to get out. But so what? It's genius and everyone else is >> probably wishing they'd thought of it first, but nobody at the time >> realized how powerful just dumping semi-organized data on the world in a >> way that could not be shut up could be. It's like we had Voice of America, >> but failed to translate that into the Internet world before some random >> Australian, and now we're all jealous and blindsided. >> >> A good cyberweapon has Mojo. It has a life of it's own. That's what makes >> them so unstoppable. >> >> -dave >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dailydave mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave >> >> > > > -- > Dave Dittrich > [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Dailydave mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave > >
_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list [email protected] https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
