A quick survey of some recent cyber news . . .
***
On 6/5, Jason Ryan reported for ABCNews on Google’s new effort to warn its users of state sponsored cyberattacks. The article cited a blog post written by Google’s VP of Security Engineering which explained that Google will warn its users by displaying the following banner message: “Warning: We believe state-sponsored attackers may be attempting to compromise your account or computer. Protect yourself now.”
***
David Jackson reported for USA TODAY on another cyberattack exercise conducted by the Obama administration . . .
***
According to Evan Perez and Adam Entous of The Wall Street Journal, the FBI will probe the disclosure of classified information surrounding the US’ involvement with Stuxnet.
***
Kim Zetter reported for Wired on how Kaspersky Labs have connected Stuxnet to Flame. Considering that the NYT reported that the US and Israel were behind Stuxnet, can we connect Flame to the US/Israel? For that matter, should we add Duqu and Conficker to the list?
The Telegraph also analyzed the news about the Stuxnet-Flame connection . . .
***
Take this for what it's worth, but the Iranians claim to have traced a recent cyberattack on their oil industry to the US. This, according Ladane Nasseri of The Detroit News.
***
The NYT had a great segment discussing whether the Stuxnet news has somehow made the US more vulnerable. The NYT's "Room for Debate" featured opinion pieces from Mikko Hypponen, James Lewis, and Ralph Langer.
I've seen a number of articles over the past few days on how the Stuxnet leak has somehow made the US weaker. The argument goes that official recognition that the US was behind Stuxnet would set some precedent for other nations, or cost the US the moral highground in international cyber treaty negotiations. I don't buy that. Anyone with a passing interest in cyber could have guessed that the US and Israel were behind Stuxnet. Nation-states had to know it too, or at least assume it. All in all, I don't think the calculus has changed all that much.
As usual, I love James Lewis' thoughts on the matter (from the NYT article):
Nor do cyberattacks against Iran increase the risk of damaging cyberattacks against the United States. It is true that we are defenseless; efforts to make us safer are hamstrung by self-interest, ideology and the gridlock of American politics. But we are no more vulnerable today than we were the day before the news. If someone decides to attack us, they may cite Iran as precedent, but it will only be to justify a decision they had already made.
Leave a Reply