On January 17, 1961, as the cold war raged around the world, Dwight Eisenhower made his farewell address as President of the United States of America. In this speech, he said:
“This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
More than 50 years later, Eisenhower’s words still represent truths, even as the political and economic forces that he described have rapidly changed. A new set of wars are being waged, and technology is the driving force behind them. These are cyberwars, and they are taking place at this very moment, all around the world.
In his 2010 book Cyber War, Richard Clarke, the American security expert, defined cyberwarfare as “actions by a nation-state to penetrate another nation’s computers or networks for the purposes of causing damage or disruption.” However, Clarke fails to acknowledge that cyberwarfare features individuals, states, and corporations as both the perpetrators and victims of attacks.
The evolution of cyberwarfare as it exists today has been most influenced by four key developments: The Wikileaks organization’s efforts to release otherwise confidential information, the creation and distribution of the Stuxnet and Flame viruses by America and Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, the efforts of Chinese state-sponsored hackers to conduct espionage against governments, corporations, and individuals worldwide, and finally, the hacking group Anonymous’s ability to successfully disrupt internet-based activities of governments, corporations, and individuals whom they view as threats.
Wikileaks and backlash
As non-state actors, the members of Wikileaks, led by Julian Assange, have taken it upon themselves to release confidential data that they have acquired. Though their targets have ranged from Barclays Bank to American former Senator Norm Coleman, the release of thousands of American diplomatic cables in 2010 arguably had the most impact on global relations.
As former Canadian diplomat Scott Gilmore told the Globe and Mail newspaper, “Ironically, WikiLeaks is inflicting the same collateral damage it so loudly abhors. The ‘Cablegate’ release is not a real victory for a more open world. It will lead to a more closed world, where repressive governments will be more free to commit atrocities against their own people and the people who try to stop them will have even less information to help prevent this.”
In this hypocritical version of cyberwarfare masked as journalism, the Wikileaks organization posits that other entities should be held accountable for their actions by Wikileaks, even though Wikileaks should be accountable to no one, because even though they promote transparency, they don’t list who their own donors are (which could include nefarious interest groups, terror organizations, governments, etc.)
Stuxnet changes the game
In the case of the Stuxnet virus, it was recently revealed by the New York Times that while George W. Bush was in the White House, he sought an alternative to physical war to stop the Iranian nuclear threat. Bush sanctioned American and Israeli operatives to work together to create systems to severely slow down the Iranians’ nuclear operations. This cyberwar was continued by Barack Obama, who, intensified these operations. And in late May, it was revealed that a second, previously undiscovered piece of even more malicious software, called Flame, has also been floating through computers throughout the world, with the ability to control their microphones, grab screenshots, transmit private data, and more. Yet while we know that the Iranian government has been affected by this virus, we are at this time unaware of which individuals, corporations, or other nation-states have been affected.
It is not only the American and Israeli governments that have engaged in cyberwarfare: The US Department of Defense acknowledges that it was victim to more than 55,000 attempted cyber attacks in 2010. Though it has frequently denied all accusations, the Chinese government is thought to be responsible for the majority of cyberattacks not only on the United States, but also directed against private firms and government entities such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and more. The list of purported attacks by the Chinese government seems endless: from attacking Google in 2010, to attacks against the Canadian government in 2011, to the British Military, to German Chancellor Angela Merckel’s office.
The “hacktivist” group Anonymous is a strong example of individuals from many countries banding together to fight against anyone whom they collectively disapprove of. From hackers, many of whom are still in their mid- teens, have wreaked havoc worldwide. Most recently, the group has attacked the Indian government in response to its censorship of sites like Vimeo (for video sharing) and the Pirate Bay (for file sharing). Yet, its previous list of victims seems endless, including the governments of Malaysia, China, Syria, and Israel, as well as companies like Sony and GM.
Consequences beyond our worst nightmares
Bearing all of the above in mind, what are the consequences that individuals, nation-states, and corporations face as the result of government sanctioned, corporate, individually created cyber warfare efforts?
Based on the above, it is highly likely that in the very near future, a city, a region, or perhaps a whole country, may wake up in chaos. As hackers in Southern California already proved, it is possible to take over the controls of computers that determine the amounts of chemicals that go into the water supply. In the wrong hands, the water of a whole population could be poisoned, which could immediately cause thousands of deaths. Similarly, disaster could strike if air traffic control systems are disrupted. Even more deadly, a whole electric grid could be taken down.
What is clear: there is no precedent for such large-scale activities, meaning that it is unknown what types of human, economic, and political impact they will have. The world will be caught off guard when such an attack occurs, so the first victims will be forced to fend for themselves.
