Thanks for the reply Bill. One correction I would like to make is that the General Staff concept is Saddle Orders not Marching Orders. No coffee no wakee.
Bill, just a suggestion
If you'd keep your posts a little shorter and concentrate on one topic at a time while not using the various styles and sizes of type, you might encourage more responses. Your posts are sort of hard to follow due to length, mixed subject matter and erratic type fonts.
Take care,
Ken
Iw
Thanks for the reply Bill. One correction I would like to make is that the General Staff concept is Saddle Orders not Marching Orders. No coffee no wakee.
Bill your concepts of cyber warfare are about 20 years out of date. Cyber-warfare is a sexed up term to refer to a "terrain". Much like land warfare, or naval warfare, or air warfare. Computers are tools used for good purposes and bad purposes much the same as tanks and trucks. Metaphorical analysis of cyber warfare will only carry you so far and the over use of the term rather than realistic terms only prejudices people against the topic.
There is terrorism, it occurs through a variety of devices and techniques, and some of those devices are communications and computer networks. Information warfare uses computers much like it uses mass media but they are not inextricably linked. Command, control, communication, and coordination using information technology (C4IT) can be simplified as "computer mediated". What is missing from your posts (and I must admit the variety of fonts and incoherence of the posts makes them nearly unreadable) is a basic understanding of commodity computing and computer convergence. These two basic concepts enlighten and inform the conflict scholar about how computers are used and why they are used.
A simple understanding of convergence and commodity tools might help. The ubiquitous refrigerator allowed for fresh foods and longer time in transit for foods. This created a more nutritious and higher value food source for soldiers. Those armies that had access and the resources to use refrigeration had a tactical advantage over their adversaries. Yet we never coined or used the term refrigeration warfare. When high value information technology assets were converged into military supply trains along with refrigeration capability the just in time supply line became a reality for food stuffs. Yet again we did not define war based on just in time inventory or it's convergence with refrigeration.
C4IT is a converging communication paradigm that is both a tactical tool as well as a strategic terrain.
Sam Liles
Selil Blog
Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.
Greatful for everyone's replys and paradigm testing
Thank you for your reply.
Originally Posted by selil
USA has run this type of paradigm before, and the result was the Air Force, separated from the Army.
The sooner the USA spins off a "cyber force" the sooner USA will dominate that Terrain also.
All Armed Forces will need to maintain a "cyber" capability dedicated to use of their service.
Bill
Last edited by BILL; 01-09-2008 at 12:49 AM.
I have read a number of good theories and explanations here at the Council, as well as a number of far-fetched propositions, and that by far is the worst I have seen in some time.All Armed Forces will need to maintain a "cyber" capability dedicated to use of their service.
BILL, we have enough of a challenge keeping our equipment and TTPs up to date, and now you expect each of the services to maintain a "cyber" warfare capability? Since you did not define the boundaries of that capability, I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that you mean a dedicated element of Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines who do nothing but focus on youtube-centric warfare with opponents who are conducting assymetric attacks against us (pushing their own internet IO, service denial attacks, and generic hacking).
Why does each service need its own force? Please offer some sort of force laydown to convince me that this is a good thing.
It took the Marine Corps a few years to come into the fold of NMCI, and guess what? It works for crap most of the time and actually restrains our productivity to a degree. Staying current with the technology leaps every six months is not a job I would wish on anybody, especially since the program is guaranteed to teeter on the whim of budget constraints every year.
The Strategy Page describes how China assembled a force few have heard about. In idyllic 1990s, the Chinese Defense Ministry established a research organization called the "NET Force" geared towards conducting information warfare. NET Force was soon joined by an irregular civilian militia; the "Red Hackers Union" (RHU). "Starting in the late 1990s, China assembled what has now become 30,000 Ministry of Public Security employees manning the Golden Shield Project (also known as The Great Firewall of China), and monitor Internet use throughout the country."
Excellent points: Hard Questions.
Here is a start: Not comprehensive but a taste.
I think the 'cyber warroir' gives you a new gun, force, Knowledge vector to guide Kinetic force.
A new terrain to destroy enemy initiatives, counter lies, propaganda, spin, track and target.
Bill
Last edited by Jedburgh; 01-09-2008 at 11:55 AM.
Bill, some discontinuous dissonance as a mirror to rambling rebellion.
The thing is we do have a communications and computer systems agency for dealing with hostile attacks. That is the mission of the NSA along with all other forms of signals intelligence. Second the United States as a land of law has treaties that say we will not attack other nations. You said in an earlier post that you had engaged in cyber-attacks which would be a direct violation of federal law. The Air force is standing up a cyber warfare command which will be interesting for a bunch of other reasons.
Currently hacktivism and petty graffiti attacks are the primary "hacks" that occur. With the exception of a few different attacks like "Titan Rain" and high profile spy ware break outs.
You totally missed the metaphor of ubiquitous communications and commodity computing as a "utility" making it air or water rather than "special". You need C4IT like you need anything else like food. C4IT makes you a better warrior but it isn't the only battlefield or tool. When you realize the Internet exists beyond the http, ftp, protocols and you dig deeper (i'm not talking dark net) the vista of the Internet takes on a deeper and broader view.
How is a predator drone controlled?
What gives a jdam the high accuracy that it known for?
What provides the telemetry for a cruise missile?
How are operational orders transmitted between general staffs and unit commands?
There are only three forms of attack possible (plus two but that is another story) over networks and computer mediated environments.
You'll have to start defining your terms better here.
A point as to etiquette as a user of THIS web forum I'm interested in using THIS web forum. Provide a link in your signature to your blog but stop trying to send us off to your website. I'm not interested in having my IP harvested, my click through behavior analyzed, or my interactions and interests monitored. Further posting large volumes of information from another BLOG here on another forum without permission from the owners of SWC/SWJ is bad news. You are fairly anonymous (your introduction left a lot to be desired) and with anonymity comes distrust. For all I know you are just violating intellectual property laws (good taste at least) and posting somebody else's blog information here as part of some IW campaign.
In any regards I think you're mixing information warfare and cyber warfare. If you start reading something like "In Athena's camp: Preparing for conflict in the information age. (1997). Santa Monica, CA: RAND." and the updated "Networks and netwars: The future of terror, crime, and militancy. (2001). Santa Monica, CA: RAND"that will take you down the information warfare and network centric warfare path you seem to be going. This is more akin to information operations than it is to tactical use of a computer for attack.
Just as a simple example information warfare is about message, and controlling the communication channel. In my laboratory cyber warfare (sic) is about destroying your capability to communicate, intercepting your command and control information, or changing your message without you knowing that we've done so. Those are simplistic examples of the confidentiality, integrity, availability triad which you can read more about from "Maconachy, W. V., Schou, C. D., Ragsdale, D., & Welch, D. (2001). A Model for Information Assurance: An Integrated Approach. Paper presented at the 2001 IEEE Workshop on Information Assurance and Security, US Military Academy, West Point, NY.".
Think about defining your terms a little better within the context of your statements. Within this area of research the disciplines jargon is not fully understood.
Sam Liles
Selil Blog
Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.
"You said in an earlier post that you had engaged in cyber-attacks which would be a direct violation of federal law."
I've gone out of my way to confirm we do not engage in illegal activities, ie hacking, and certainly have not violated any federal laws,
Thats quite a threating accusation.
Please provide quotes, I don't want any misunderstandings.
Or unnecessary investigations, based on a mis-communication.
Maybe its a misunderstanding of term "cyber attack".
I'd like to clear this up. thanks for checking it out. Others may have taken it that way too.
Don't remember saying that, certainly didn't mean it in that context..
Now I'll read the rest of your post.
Bill
Congrads on your DHS Fellowship, its nice to have an Expert around.
.
Last edited by Jedburgh; 01-09-2008 at 11:57 AM.
In this thread your posts #47 and post #100 you make suggestions about operatives taking direct actions against terrorist organizations AND civilians providing denialbility. Perhaps I misread and took that to literally. In my experience direct action equates to the adversary not having the will of ability to act further.
Hacking is a pejorative term that has been bent and blended into uselessness so I'm immediately suspicious at it's use (your post on hacker training this thread #97). If we are talking about message, communication channels, or more succinctly propaganda then that is one discussion. If we are talking about creating kinetic effect (your post #106) through computers that is another discussion. From what you've posted it seems you are mixing the two concepts and they are not the same. It was recently declassified that it is perfectly possible to use computers for kinetic effect and blow up a generator.
Thank you. It's always nice to get outside recognition. Between, Purdue, NSA, DOD, NSF, and now DHS I have effectively paid zero money to realize my personal goal of getting a PhD.
As a faculty member at a regional university (third tier somebody once called it) funding and grantsmanship are little tougher to acquire than at an R1. You won't find it on my BLOG but I have a little over $1.5 million in outside and internal funding over the last four years. I'm especially proud of my Cisco funded security laboratory and virtual network laboratory system.
Sam Liles
Selil Blog
Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.
DEATH THREATS AGAINST BUSH! HOSTED IN calf
We tracked the web master to Kuwait,
He took web page down over night,
then put it back up under someone else's name and changed text,
Then he says its not monitored.
More here:
Huge campaign to assassinate Bush.
Bill
Last edited by BILL; 01-11-2008 at 08:01 PM.
Connections
"Al-Qaida's MySpace": How Suicide Bombers Are Being Recruited Online
By Evan Kohlmann
This morning, the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point released the second issue of its Sentinel journal, including my new piece on "Al-Qaida's MySpace"--which tracks a growing number of case studies in which users on extremist Internet forums such as Al-Ekhlaas have been vanishing off the forums, only to suddenly re-appear later as suicide bombers in the service of Al-Qaida in Iraq. The report includes both testimonials gathered from the forums themselves, and never-before-seen evidence uncovered during the British investigation of "Irhaby 007" (a.k.a. Younis Tsouli). Tsouli's former headquarters on the web--the Muntada al-Ansar forum--was a major center for such online terrorist recruiting. In August 2005, a senior Muntada al-Ansar administrator broke the “good news” to fellow users about a “meeting of Ansar forum members” inside Iraq:....
"This story is fascinating and emotional because it is closely linked to… the Ansar forum… One of our brothers who was a member on the Ansar forum and was originally from a country adjacent to Iraq decided to leave and fight in the cause of Allah. Allah made it possible for him to meet with an additional five brothers from other countries who had all come to fight in the cause of Allah… Later, after talking with one another, they all realized that they were fellow users on the Ansar forum, and that made them very happy. They began crying and their love for Allah increased… I also inform you that one of the brothers who is a member on the Ansar forum will soon rejoin his beloved comrades in the land of jihad and martyrdom, the land of Mesopotamia, and he will also participate in a suicide operation."
SOURCE:
100 Jahiddies on Facebook
Bill
I think this thread demonstrates how we adopted Competitive Intelligence methods over the past year to Counter Intel.
And hope it is usefull, we are user friendly and available.
Last edited by Jedburgh; 01-19-2008 at 01:33 AM. Reason: Edited links. No e-mail addresses in posts.
Just released today
New Jahidiie encryption program.
and
We have the Computer IP forTaliban webmaster, Adil Watanmal (aka Murchal), and location.
B
Last edited by BILL; 01-19-2008 at 04:41 AM.
What to do with the terrorist web sites?
Would like your input/thoughts.
Ddan has an interesting post on the subject: here
What to do with the terrorist web sites?
It is a involoved paradigm, and we are picking our way through the potential mine field.
Some argue to leave them up for the Intel production.
And that some Intel may be lost if they are shut down.
Dan speaks of a tipping point.
I am also looking at a tipping point.
A different tipping point.
Consoider for a moment if ALL terrorist sites were taken down,
one swipe world wide?
That would have a significant impact on recruiting, and generating home grown terrorist, and many other benefits.
Each time a site is shut down, they loose part of their audience,
and loose data and creditability.
Not to mention the security they must build and maintain to set up a new site,
and the psysic energy and the blow to morale, consider loosing your own Blog.
The wasted time setting it back up knowing it will be shut back down again.
and loss of command and control, and com links.
If they email members of the new site then they are also notifying us.
We are hidden in their lists.
We have passwords to most sites, and back doors and mine them for links, urls and members
and copy the entire site before shut down. And are working to make these copies
available to the FEDS, we know they probally have copies already, but in case we take down one that don't have a copy for , we do have the copy. We have the man power to avail our selves
of these capabilities with Company "C".
Company "C" allows me to move from Intel collection and reporting to developing actionable Intel for the FEDS, and planning operations and prosecuting the GWOT with in legal limits.
In an area that needs service.
We also give the FEDS prior notice before we take down a site, and are willing to sign secrecy
agreements on any sites they want to remain up.
Of course it can be argued that this drives them to the Dark web.
Which limits their public recruitment and command and control to the Ummah.
And reduces the number of sites.
And we have moles working in many of these dark sites.
If you have a dark site it limits your recruitment and public influence.
And command and control to a very limited cadre.
The estimates we have seen estimate there are 4,000 terrorist web sites.
We recently took down a little known hub for propaganda distribution.
Thousands of vids very little text.
The number of terror sites hosted by American Companys could be drastically cut
by a few prosecutions under current laws, as it stands now their is no down side
to hosting a terror site other than Bad PR when they are caught, and then they
claim they didn't know. . Violation authority cited:
And many hosts just ignore the complaints, currently without
any prosecutions the law is with out teeth.
Company "C" is looking for an Attorney to file complaints against the
hosts for violation the laws, we can supply the complainant and evidence.
Drive them to web sites in terror supporting countrys and
you open the possibility of direct attacks on servers by USA military.
Under the color of law and war.
We think this is a workable solution to the 4,000 terror web sites
and maintain copies of sites for further study.
Bill
On the other hand...
Some disagree...
LINK
Bizzzar
The argument seems to be leave the terrorist sites up to collect Intel,
Well the total number have grown to over 4,000. sites.
And the sites are recruiting others and the number of sites continue to grow.
This paradigm will insure the growth of Jahiddie sites, at what point do they put stopping recruitment ahead of intel gathering?
Feels like the cart before the horse.
Watch them grow and collect info???
Bizzar
G
Taking down the "terrorist" websites completely is the metaphorical form of conventional warfare versus small wars type doctrine or counter insurgency. Wholesale disruption of terrorist websites would be denying the insurgent the terrain. When in reality according to counter insurgency you wish to change the perception of the insurgent not embolden them to new or higher levels. You don't want to create an asymmetric arms race that only they can win. It could be argued that destruction of the terrorist communication mechanism actually hurts the effort.
Sam Liles
Selil Blog
Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.
boggled
"It could be argued that destruction of the terrorist communication mechanism actually hurts the effort."
AND
"You don't want to create an asymmetric arms race that only they can win."
Gee Selil you must be playing devils advocate.
I was speechless.
If this is the paradigm then its gone around the Bend, the work product has superseded the Goal.
That seems akin to "giving them bullets so we can see where they are", when they shoot at us.
The hard core are not likely to be converted.
"an asymmetric arms race that only they can win"
I couldn't disagree more.
The only way THEY can win on the WWW is if USA doesn't mount an offensive.
It sounds like it may have been decided USA can't win on the WWW.
Watch Company "C" we will curb them.
Thanks for your comment.
Bill
Last edited by BILL; 03-23-2008 at 03:06 AM.
You might want to try the SPLC Southern Poverty Law Center, they have done some things like this in the past, but it usually against Domestic groups. http://www.splcenter.org/index.jsp
Last edited by slapout9; 03-23-2008 at 02:51 AM. Reason: add link
thanks
Excellent Idea
DONE.
Bill
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks