Weaponized information seeks a new target in cyberspace: Users’ minds

July 30, 2018 6.30am EDT

Richard Forno
Senior Lecturer, Cybersecurity & Internet Researcher, University of Maryland, 
Baltimore County

https://theconversation.com/weaponized-information-seeks-a-new-target-in-cyberspace-users-minds-100069

University of Maryland, Baltimore County provides funding as a member of The 
Conversation US.

The Russian attacks on the 2016 U.S. presidential election and the country’s 
continuing election-related hacking have happened across all three dimensions 
of cyberspace – physical, informational and cognitive. The first two are 
well-known: For years, hackers have exploited hardware and software flaws to 
gain unauthorized access to computers and networks – and stolen information 
they’ve found. The third dimension, however, is a newer target – and a more 
concerning one.

This three-dimensional view of cyberspace comes from my late mentor, Professor 
Dan Kuehl of the National Defense University, who expressed concern about 
traditional hacking activities and what they meant for national security. But 
he also foresaw the potential – now clear to the public at large – that those 
tools could be used to target people’s perceptions and thought processes, too. 
That’s what the Russians allegedly did, according to federal indictments issued 
in February and July, laying out evidence that Russian civilians and military 
personnel used online tools to influence Americans’ political views – and, 
potentially, their votes. They may be setting up to do it again for the 2018 
midterm elections.

Some observers suggest that using internet tools for espionage and as fuel for 
disinformation campaigns is a new form of “hybrid warfare.” Their idea is that 
the lines are blurring between the traditional kinetic warfare of bombs, 
missiles and guns, and the unconventional, stealthy warfare long practiced 
against foreigners’ “hearts and minds” by intelligence and special forces 
capabilities.

However, I believe this isn’t a new form of war at all: Rather, it is the same 
old strategies taking advantage of the latest available technologies. Just as 
online marketing companies use sponsored content and search engine manipulation 
to distribute biased information to the public, governments are using 
internet-based tools to pursue their agendas. In other words, they’re hacking a 
different kind of system through social engineering on a grand scale.

Old goals, new techniques

More than 2,400 years ago, the Chinese military strategist and philosopher Sun 
Tzu made it an axiom of war that it’s best to “subdue the enemy without 
fighting.” Using information – or disinformation, or propaganda – as a weapon 
can be one way to destabilize a population and disable the target country. In 
1984 a former KGB agent who defected to the West discussed this as a long-term 
process and more or less predicted what’s happening in the U.S. now.

The Russians created false social media accounts to simulate political 
activists – such as @TEN_GOP, which purported to be associated with the 
Tennessee Republican Party. Just that one account attracted more than 100,000 
followers. The goal was to distribute propaganda, such as captioned photos, 
posters or short animated graphics, purposely designed to enrage and engage 
these accounts’ followers. Those people would then pass the information along 
through their own personal social networks.

Starting from seeds planted by Russian fakers, including some who claimed to be 
U.S. citizens, those ideas grew and flourished through amplification by real 
people. Unfortunately, whether originating from Russia or elsewhere, fake 
information and conspiracy theories can form the basis for discussion at major 
partisan media outlets.

As ideas with niche online beginnings moved into the traditional mass media 
landscape, they serve to keep controversies alive by sustaining divisive 
arguments on both sides. For instance, one Russian troll factory had its online 
personas host rallies both for and against each of the major candidates in the 
2016 presidential election. Though the rallies never took place, the online 
buzz about them helped inflame divisions in society.

The trolls also set up Twitter accounts purportedly representing local news 
organizations – including defunct ones – to take advantage of Americans’ 
greater trust of local news sources than national ones. These accounts operated 
for several years – one for the Chicago Daily News, closed since 1978, was 
created in May 2014 and collected 20,000 followers – passing along legitimate 
local news stories, likely seeking to win followers’ trust ahead of future 
disinformation campaigns. Shut down before they could fulfill that end, these 
accounts cleverly aimed to exploit the fact that many Americans’ political 
views cloud their ability to separate fact from opinion in the news.

These sorts of activities are functions of traditional espionage: Foment 
discord and then sit back while the target population becomes distracted 
arguing among themselves.

Fighting digital disinformation is hard

Analyzing, let alone countering, this type of provocative behavior can be 
difficult. Russia isn’t alone, either: The U.S. tries to influence foreign 
audiences and global opinions, including through Voice of America online and 
radio services and intelligence services’ activities. And it’s not just 
governments that get involved. Companies, advocacy groups and others also can 
conduct disinformation campaigns.

Unfortunately, laws and regulations are ineffective remedies. Further, social 
media companies have been fairly slow to respond to this phenomenon. Twitter 
reportedly suspended more than 70 million fake accounts earlier this summer. 
That included nearly 50 social media accounts like the fake Chicago Daily News 
one.

Facebook, too, says it is working to reduce the spread of “fake news” on its 
platform. Yet both companies make their money from users’ activity on their 
sites – so they are conflicted, trying to stifle misleading content while also 
boosting users’ involvement.

Real defense happens in the brain

The best protection against threats to the cognitive dimension of cyberspace 
depends on users’ own actions and knowledge. Objectively educated, rational 
citizens should serve as the foundation of a strong democratic society. But 
that defense fails if people don’t have the skills – or worse, don’t use them – 
to think critically about what they’re seeing and examine claims of fact before 
accepting them as true.

American voters expect ongoing Russian interference in U.S. elections. In fact, 
it appears to have already begun. To help combat that influence, the U.S. 
Justice Department plans to alert the public when its investigations discover 
foreign espionage, hacking and disinformation relating to the upcoming 2018 
midterm elections. And the National Security Agency has created a task force to 
counter Russian hacking of election systems and major political parties’ 
computer networks.

These efforts are a good start, but the real solution will begin when people 
start realizing they’re being subjected to this sort of cognitive attack and 
that it’s not all just a hoax.
_______________________________________________
Infowarrior mailing list
Infowarrior@attrition.org
https://attrition.org/mailman/listinfo/infowarrior

Reply via email to