Risk
8/17/2009
02:10 PM
Connect Directly
LinkedIn
Twitter
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Cyber Attack Against Georgia Blurred Civilian And Military

Last year's cyber assault against Georgia represents a template for civilian involvement in military action.

The cyber attacks against Georgia last year marked the first known time that computer networks were assaulted by civilians in conjunction with physical attacks conducted by a national military force.

A report on the events of August 2008 by the U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit, a non-profit research institute, suggests that future conflicts may follow a similar course, raising difficult questions about who represents the enemy in cyberspace and what countermeasures might be appropriate against civilian combatants.

An overview of the report states that the cyber attacks against targets in Georgia were carried out by civilians with little or no involvement of the Russian military. But the organizers of the cyber attacks had advance notice of the Russian plans and were told when military operations had commenced so they could coordinate digital bombardment with physical bombardment.

"Many of the cyber attacks were so close in time to the corresponding military operations that there had to be close cooperation between people in the Russian military and the civilian cyber attackers," the report overview states. "When the cyber attacks began, they did not involve any reconnaissance or mapping state, but jumped directly to the sort of packets that were best suited to jamming the Web sites under attack. This indicates that the necessary reconnaissance and the writing of the attack scripts had to have been done in advance."

John Bumgarner, research director for security technology at the U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit, who helped prepare the report, said that government policies to deal with this blurring of lines between military and civilian aggression has yet to be formulated.

The matter is complicated by the fact that civilians may not necessarily be participating in such events willingly, if their computers are compromised and are part of a botnet.

"Where are the battle lines in cyberspace?" asks Bumgarner. "And who is the enemy?"

Those questions may take a decade or longer to answer, said Bumgarner. It's a very complex set of issues, he said, and will only become more so as the slow spread of broadband Internet connectivity brings more people with divergent views together online.

Bumgarner expects the attacks on Georgia to become a template for upcoming acts of aggression. "It will be a trend that will be in future conflicts," he said. "Civilians can become willing participants in fairly major cyber events and they can be anywhere in the world."

And many appear ready to do so. Earlier this month, in conjunction with the first anniversary of the conflict between Georgia and Russia, a pro-Georgia blogger was targeted on Blogger, Facebook, LiveJournal, and Twitter with a denial of service attack.

The answer, Bumgarner says, isn't turning the Internet into the equivalent of a police state. Rather, it's more openness and information sharing so the impact of cyber conflicts can be mitigated.

Ultimately, he says, the Internet may need an international organization, like the U.N. Security Council, to handle acts of cyber aggression.

InformationWeek has published an in-depth report on smartphone security. Download the report here (registration required).

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
Partner Perspectives
What's This?
In a digital world inundated with advanced security threats, Intel Security seeks to transform how we live and work to keep our information secure. Through hardware and software development, Intel Security delivers robust solutions that integrate security into every layer of every digital device. In combining the security expertise of McAfee with the innovation, performance, and trust of Intel, this vision becomes a reality.

As we rely on technology to enhance our everyday and business life, we must too consider the security of the intellectual property and confidential data that is housed on these devices. As we increase the number of devices we use, we increase the number of gateways and opportunity for security threats. Intel Security takes the “security connected” approach to ensure that every device is secure, and that all security solutions are seamlessly integrated.
Featured Writers
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading's October Tech Digest
Fast data analysis can stymie attacks and strengthen enterprise security. Does your team have the data smarts?
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2012-2413
Published: 2014-10-20
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the ja_purity template for Joomla! 1.5.26 and earlier allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the Mod* cookie parameter to html/modules.php.

CVE-2012-5244
Published: 2014-10-20
Multiple SQL injection vulnerabilities in Banana Dance B.2.6 and earlier allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the (1) return, (2) display, (3) table, or (4) search parameter to functions/suggest.php; (5) the id parameter to functions/widgets.php, (6) the category parameter to...

CVE-2012-5694
Published: 2014-10-20
Multiple SQL injection vulnerabilities in Bulb Security Smartphone Pentest Framework (SPF) before 0.1.3 allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the (1) agentPhNo, (2) controlPhNo, (3) agentURLPath, (4) agentControlKey, or (5) platformDD1 parameter to frameworkgui/attach2Agents.p...

CVE-2012-5695
Published: 2014-10-20
Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in Bulb Security Smartphone Pentest Framework (SPF) 0.1.2 through 0.1.4 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that conduct (1) shell metacharacter or (2) SQL injection attacks or (3) send an SMS m...

CVE-2012-5696
Published: 2014-10-20
Bulb Security Smartphone Pentest Framework (SPF) before 0.1.3 does not properly restrict access to frameworkgui/config, which allows remote attackers to obtain the plaintext database password via a direct request.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Follow Dark Reading editors into the field as they talk with noted experts from the security world.