August 14, 2018
Battlefield Internet
A Plan for Securing Cyberspace
Cyberspace has been recognized as a new arena for competition among states ever since it came into existence. In the United States, there have long been warnings of a “cyber–Pearl Harbor”—a massive digital attack that could cripple the country’s critical infrastructure without a single shot being fired. Presidential commissions, military task force reports, and congressional investigations have been calling attention to such a risk for decades. In 1984, the Reagan administration warned of the “significant security challenges” of the coming information age. And just this year, Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, said of such threats, “the lights are blinking red.”
Yet the Internet has always been much more than a venue for conflict and competition; it is the backbone of global commerce and communication. That said, cyberspace is not, as is often thought, simply part of the global commons in the way that the air or the sea is. States assert jurisdiction over, and companies claim ownership of, the physical infrastructure that composes the Internet and the data that traverses it. States and companies built the Internet, and both are responsible for maintaining it. Actions taken in the public sector affect the private sector, and vice versa. In this way, the Internet has always been hybrid in nature.
So, accordingly, is the real cyberwar threat. It turns out that for all the increasingly vehement warnings about a cyber–Pearl Harbor, states have shown little appetite for using cyberattacks for large-scale destruction. The immediate threat is more corrosive than explosive. States are using the tools of cyberwarfare to undermine the very foundation of the Internet: trust. They are hacking into banks, meddling in elections, stealing intellectual property, and bringing private companies to a standstill. The result is that an arena that the world relies on for economic and informational exchange has turned into an active battlefield.
Read the Full Article at Foreign Affairs
More from CNAS
-
Summary of Findings and Recommendations
Reports
KEY FINDINGS Soldier survivability is a function of protection and other relevant operational factors, such as situational awareness, mobility, and lethality. Throughout histo...
By Paul Scharre, Lauren Fish, Katherine Kidder & Amy Schafer
-
Human Performance Enhancement
Reports
Executive Summary No attributes are more foundational to success in combat than the physical and cognitive performance of warfighters. Technological advantage has always playe...
By Paul Scharre & Lauren Fish
-
Human Performance Enhancement TEST
Reports
No attributes are more foundational to success in combat than the physical and cognitive performance of warfighters. Technological advantage has always played a central role i...
By Paul Scharre & Lauren Fish
-
Ep. 27: CENTCOM's Gen. Votel; Exosuits and super soldiers; Weaponizing social media and more
Podcast
This week on the program: • During a flight over Turkmenistan this week, America’s top commander in the Middle East spoke by phone with Defense One Executive Editor Kevin Baro...
By Paul Scharre & Lauren Fish
