Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Ask Lt. Col. John Bircher About Cyber Warfare Concepts

Posted by timothy on Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:20 PM
from the please-include-your-gps-coordinates dept.
The Air Force is not the only U.S. military branch trying to come to grips with the electronic side of warfare, both current and future. The U.S. Army Computer Network Operations (CNO)-Electronic Warfare (EW) Proponent (USACEWP), located at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas — home to the U.S. Army's Combined Arms Center — serves as the Army's hub for cyber-electronic concepts and capabilities. This is the organization responsible for developing doctrine, materiel and training to prepare the Army for cyber-electronic engagements. For example, USACEWP has developed training teams to ensure that U.S. commanders and soldiers around the world are fully informed of cyber-electronic capabilities at their disposal. Leading the Proponent's Futures branch is Lt. Col John "Chip" Bircher; Bircher entered the Army in 1989 as an Infantry officer, then served in various command and staff positions, most recently Information Operations (IO). He was the IO Chief for the 25th Infantry Division (Light), Hawaii, and Director of IO for Combined Joint Task Force -76, Bagram, Afghanistan. If you want to know more about the realities and challenges that face an armed, global IT department in a time when electronic warfare is ever more important and dangerous, now's your chance to ask Lt. Col. Bircher some questions. We'll pass on the highest-moderated questions for Lt. Col. Bircher to answer. Usual Slashdot interview rules apply.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Air Force Cyber Command General Answers Slashdot Questions 543 comments
Here are the answers to your questions for Major General William T. Lord, who runs the just-getting-off-the ground Air Force Cyber Command. Before you ask: yes, his answers were checked by both PR and security people. Also, please note that this interview is a "first," in that Generals don't typically take questions from random people on forums like Slashdot, and that it is being watched all the way up the chain of command into the Pentagon. Many big-wigs will read what you post here -- and a lot of them are interested in what you say and may even use your suggestions to help set future recruiting and operational policies. A special "thank you" goes to Maj. Gen. Lord for participating in this experiment, along with kudos to the (necessarily anonymous) people who helped us arrange this interview.
[+] IT: DVD Porn Viruses Ravage US Soldiers' Computers 489 comments
stevegee58 writes "Tom Ricks' Inbox in the Sunday Washington Post reported that bootleg DVDs purchased in Iraqi markets ('souks') are frequently infected with viruses. Iraqi soldiers were affected as well; electronic interaction between Iraqi and US soldiers frequently resulted in a corresponding exchange of viruses from these infected DVDs."
[+] News: Expert Dissects Estonian Cyber-War 172 comments
Stony Stevenson points out an iTnews summary of a security researcher's account of the cyber-attacks on Estonia last year. The full report [PDF] is also available. We've discussed this internet-based conflict in the past. From the report: "In the days leading up to the attack, numerous clues pointed to a large-scale operation that was being planned online. Russian-language Internet discussion forums were abuzz with preparations for an online attack. Three days before the expected onslaught, Estonia planned to release the news of the coming strike in hopes that European media attention would oblige the EU to pressure the Kremlin to intervene, whether or not the attacks emanated from the Russian authorities."
[+] IT: Chinese Government Accused of Hacking Congress 237 comments
Alotau writes "Chinese hacking is getting some serious Congressional attention. Two House members said Wednesday their Capitol Hill computers, containing information about political dissidents from around the world, have been hacked by sources apparently working out of China. Virginia Rep. Frank Wolf says four of his computers were hacked. New Jersey Rep. Chris Smith says two of his computers were compromised in December 2006 and March 2007. The two lawmakers are longtime critics of China's record on human rights."
[+] Lt. Col. John Bircher Answers Your Questions 232 comments
A few weeks ago, you asked questions of Lt. Col. John Bircher, head of an organization with a difficult-to-navigate name: the U.S. Army Computer Network Operations (CNO)-Electronic Warfare (EW) Proponent's Futures Branch. Lt. Col. Bircher has answered from his perspective, at length, not just the usual 10 questions, but several more besides. Read on for his take on cyberwar, jurisdiction, ethics, and more.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:24PM (#23766793)
    Wait a second. Aren't members of the John Birch Society [wikipedia.org] called "John Birchers"? If so, I'd say this poor bastard has an unfortunate name.
  • Technique? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Manip (656104) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:25PM (#23766821)
    Does the US Army take advantage of traditional misconfiguration and social engineering techniques in order to compromise a network or are the US government developing a home grown list of exploits to gain access to foreign government systems?
  • Legal Ramifications (Score:5, Interesting)

    by muellerr1 (868578) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:27PM (#23766847) Homepage
    How does the military ensure that it is operating within the law regarding online military offensive activities? Are there any laws or oversight, as such? If so, how are those laws and/or oversight affected by a declaration of war?
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Since war never gets declared anymore, I doubt they've even thought about your latter question.
  • I'm interested in why so many sensitive networks are even hooked up to the internet in the first place, or why trivial systems are so often bundled with sensitive ones under the same security frameworks.

    Why aren't there more isolated networks that would require physical contact or interception to get to in the first place? Do sensitive systems really need any connection at all to the conventional internet in the first place?

    I know that many places in the DoD do take this approach (people having one computer for safe email and browsing, and a completely different computer for sensitive intel), and certainly it's more expensive and less convenient. But when the internet is basically just a big pathway leading directly to your backdoor, why take any chance at all, ever?
    • I'm interested in why so many sensitive networks are even hooked up to the internet in the first place, or why trivial systems are so often bundled with sensitive ones under the same security frameworks.

      Good point - I guess if the Internet had been designed by the military (or, say, by a military research group) it certainly wouldn't have ended up this way...
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Why aren't there more isolated networks that would require physical contact or interception to get to in the first place?

      Maybe they have people who can go places and attach wireless / satellite access points to various networks. It's not a safe job, but the military has plenty of jobs that aren't safe.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      It is often the case that the sensitive systems aren't directly connected to the Internet. Instead, the sensitive system gets inadvertently connected to another (less-sensitive) system that is connected to the Internet. The second systems gets compromised, which gives the attacker a way to attack the first system.

      For example, as I understand it, a nuclear plant was taken offline by attackers. The control system was not connected to the Internet. However, the management system (payroll, timecards, etc

  • What is that? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:29PM (#23766877)
    What, specifically, would be a "cyber-electronic engagement".

    Include examples.

    Compare/contrast with traditional forms of intelligence gathering (wiretaps, listening devices, etc) and their counter-measures.
  • Interview Question (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:30PM (#23766905)
    With the political tilt as it is, a large part of the software development community is likely prejudiced against helping our country. With this in mind, how do you recruit the most creative and skilled people that this country has to offer?
    • by Daniel Dvorkin (106857) * on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:56PM (#23767365) Homepage Journal
      With the political tilt as it is, a large part of the software development community is likely prejudiced against helping our country.

      You made a typo there. Here's a correction:

      With the political tilt as it is, a large part of the software development community is likely inclined against helping politicians use the Army as a tool to fight wars which harm our country.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        No, he's pretty much right. I gave up DARPA contracts and the opportunity to work in the Defense Industry recently because I felt like I had blood on my hands. It wasn't because I thought that the war was bad for America. It's because I didn't want to program guidance systems which lead to the direct death and maiming of civilians. It's because I didn't want to write simulators that teach our soldiers to kill without showing them ramifications of that killing. It's because I don't want to have a hand in col
    • a large part of the software development community is likely prejudiced against helping our country

      Say what?

      If you mean to say lots of us don't support invading foreign countries without causus belli, or we start complaining at the suspension of habeas corpus and being jailed indefinitely without charges, then you're confusing "helping our country" with supporting the government.

      Defending Liberty and Supporting our President are not necessarily the same thing.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      With this in mind, how do you recruit the most creative and skilled people that this country has to offer?

      Probably he'd rather recruit people who will obey orders to the best of their abilities as long as those orders are legal. I don't think the military is interested in people who want an option to leave if they don't agree with their orders.

      There are people who don't make good soldiers. I'm one of them. That doesn't mean that out of a population of ~300 million he won't find the people he's looking for.
  • Hacker war... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Notquitecajun (1073646) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:31PM (#23766933)
    I doubt you could REALLY answer this, but Is the US military playing any sort of role in the semi-undergroung "hacker war" that appears to be going on between China and the US?
    • And if and if ... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:59PM (#23767409)
      And if there actually is a "Hacker War" between us ... and if our military is currently playing a role in such ... are there any civilian applications that will be released to help defend our non-military assets (corporations, education, etc)?

      Example: the NSA has worked on SELinux.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:32PM (#23766957)
    to fight. Will we have to go to basic training?

    If so, would basic training be to train us to stay up all night, living on pizza, soda, Skittles, and porn?

    If so, where do I sign up?!?

  • Since the Air Force is the U.S. military branch claiming dominance in "cyberspace" (along with air and space), how do you view the Army's relationship with the Air Force in "cyberspace"? Will the Army seek to take over all of the "cyberspace warfare", carve out its own niche in cyberspace, or peacefully coexist with the Air Force?

    With respect to leadership in this area across the DoD, do you feel that the Air Force being denied the program executive role for all DoD UAV endeavors represents an opportunity for the Army increase its role with respect to UAVs (as many people see cyberspace and UAVs to be inextricably linked)?

  • Attacks... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Notquitecajun (1073646) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:33PM (#23766971)
    Without diving into details that compromise security, can you reveal anything about the types or quantities of attacks that the US military is able to fend off, and how often they are faced?
    • by Sloppy (14984) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:10PM (#23767601) Homepage Journal

      Without diving into details that compromise security

      Can you imagine what might have happened, if you had not so qualified your question? He might have let the cat out of the bag!

      Personally, I would have phrased it this way: "Please tell us everything you're up to. (It's ok. We're cool.)"

  • China (Score:5, Interesting)

    by je ne sais quoi (987177) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:44PM (#23767157)
    What is the U.S. Army doing to protect U.S. sensitive information from the frequent number of cyber-attacks originating from inside the People's Republic of China? Is it primarily defensive?
  • Recruitment (Score:5, Interesting)

    by caljorden (166413) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:47PM (#23767199)
    Does the US Air Force, or any branch of the armed services, currently recruit for cyber-related positions directly? Or is it a requirement that all members come out of the standard armed services personnel? If there is currently no system for recruiting the best and brightest CS/IT/Security personnel from the civilian population, would that ever be considered?
    • Re:Recruitment (Score:5, Insightful)

      by db32 (862117) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:14PM (#23767651) Journal
      I can answer this one for you. Yes they do. The Air Force in particular has been getting much more active in advertising it's increasing need for the intel/cyber style missions. You basically go through the same process everyone else does.

      1. Go to the recruiter and say "I want to do XYZ". If you are lucky you will get a recruiter that isn't a slimeball and will actually help you do specifically what you want. Hit or miss here, some are really amazing folks that know how to work things, others are asshats that know how to sleaze kids in. Do your research first. Non military and recruiters are about the last people you want to talk to for "how it really is" information, one is clueless and comes up with nonsense stories, the other has a clue and comes up with nonsense stories. Currently active or recently retired people will have the best information, though it will frequently be a bit dated. It is best to refine your questions with them and then ask specific pointed questions of the recruiters.

      2. Go to the MEPS (Military Entrance Processing Station I believe) and do the tests. ASVAB being the big one here, all branches use these scores in one way or another to determine what jobs you are qualified to do. This isn't exactly a hard test by any stretch, more than anything it gives the military a guess as to how complex of a school they can send you to without wasting money on you failing out. You will also go through the whole physical thing, eye tests, piss tests, blah blah blah.

      3. Go to the career manager folks. Each branch has a different name for them and this part will typically happen at the MEPS. Again, much like recruiters they are hit or miss. However, they have a bit better of an excuse. They aren't there to convince you to join so much as for you to tell them what specific job you want to do. These are the people that look up your scores and compare that to job requirements and then check for openings in that job. They process tons of people per day, many of which have no idea what they want to do other than "work on computers" or "fix planes" or whatever. The key to coming out of this is to do your research well before you go. Narrow down what you want to do to a few jobs and know their code for whichever branch you are talking to. These people are experts at human resources stuff, not the details of whatever career you want. They probably won't be able to answer much unless they came from that career or know someone in that career. The best bet is to get your recruiter to arrange some time to meet people in the career field you are interested in and get the answers that way.

      4. Go to basic training. Everyone goes, no way past that.

      5. Go to your school. Each branch does this a bit differently, but after basic training you will go to the school for your chosen job. This could be 2 weeks long, it could be 2 years long, all depends on the job.

      6. Pray for your assignment. Now you are in, you have the career you want, and now it is a roll of the dice. You go where they need your career, period. There are a number of programs to finagle your way around to places you want, but don't expect any of them to help you much in your early days. Your best bet here is to do a damned good job, don't be a fuckup, and let your supervisors know what your goals are. Good supervisors will help you get where you want to go. Above all else, don't expect it to happen quickly.

      National Guard units basically follow the same steps, except for the assignment process. With the Guard you will be joining a specific unit when you enlist. So you will already know exactly what your assignment will be. The Guard units are able to do much more targeted recruiting because of this. The Active Duty world you kind of go into a big pot and stay there unless you managed to get into special assignments (usually by being really good at what you do and leaning forward for opportunities).
      • Re:Recruitment (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TubeSteak (669689) on Thursday June 12 2008, @02:31PM (#23768979) Journal

        1. Go to the recruiter and say "I want to do XYZ". If you are lucky you will get a recruiter that isn't a slimeball and will actually help you do specifically what you want. Hit or miss here, some are really amazing folks that know how to work things, others are asshats that know how to sleaze kids in.
        If it isn't part of the enlistment contract that you sign, the military can make you peel potatoes and wash dishes for the term of your enlistment and you have zero recourse.

        "But the recruiter promised me" means absolutely nothing.
        If it isn't in writing, don't expect it to happen.
        The corollary to this is: if it is in writing and you have to sue, at best expect a Pyrrhic victory.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:48PM (#23767229)
    Conventional military is bound by the Geneva convention. To date, there is no international law governing military info-war. Are you therefore no longer bound not to attack civilian targets? Is scrambling hospital records to create civilian deaths by mistreatment considered a valid attack?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:51PM (#23767275)
    the worlds most insecure operating sytem? Seriously, I just had to go through the Army accreditation process at work, and all the guidelines basically say that Windows is the most secure according to the army. Several of the policies do nothing to increase security but are windows only features, a not so subtle hint that if you want to be "secure" you should be using Windows. The policies also states that since open source is "unsupported" you should use a commercial OS unless you can find "support" for the open source software. The scrutiny that the Linux/Unix machines are put through is MUCH more than Windows machines are. Windows machines are basically said to be "secure" if you apply all the patches and set a couple of settings. Its as if the Army considers Windows to be the most secure instead of the least secure. The whole security accreditation process seemed to be a giant push for us to move to Windows, which means that in my opinion the whole exercise was intellectually bankrupt. Why does the Army continue to push windows despite its absolutely horrendous security track record?
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Interesting, because at the DoE- (mainly) and DoD- (partly) funded lab at which I work, Linux and Unix (and things like OSX) users are given much *less* scrutiny than those using Windows.
  • Jurisdiction? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Caerdwyn (829058) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:54PM (#23767333)
    Given that the most likely targets for cyber warfare are civilian targets, and that the perpetrators will likely be either non-government organizations or non-military employees of foreign governments, how do you see the jurisdiction question playing out? In particular, at what point are there handoffs in investigation, arrest, and prosecution between the US military, the FBI, and local authorities of affected civilian targets?
  • by introspekt.i (1233118) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:56PM (#23767361)
    What steps is the Army taking to avoid overlap with the Air Force's "cyber warfare" program(s)? Is avoiding overlap considered necessary, or is redundancy considered a good thing? Are there plans to collaborate on large scale with the Air Force, or keep the programs isolated from one another?
  • Source Code (Score:3, Interesting)

    by g0bshiTe (596213) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:58PM (#23767391)
    In the event of a "Cyber Attack" (read we go after them) would the task force secure source code, to search for hidden vectors of attack?

    I realize this is based on the assumption that we know what OS and programs they are running, but Windows for instance, it's reasonable to assume that most computer users use some form of it either legally aquired or illegally.
  • Timing and relevancy (Score:5, Interesting)

    by zappepcs (820751) on Thursday June 12 2008, @12:59PM (#23767411) Journal
    It's common knowledge that what we call the Internet was suckled by the military. Black-hat and white-hat security conferences and practices have been an active part of Internet security for over a decade.

    Can you explain what seems to be the US Military arriving at the game in the third inning?

    Having had TSEC and observed security processes and procedures, such as tempest precautions some time ago, I'm having trouble understanding why the 'cyber defenses' of the US Military only now seem to be actually realized.

    Is the delay due to funding? Priorities? or simply to underestimation of what the rest of the world was up to all this time?

    Please be as specific as you are able to be.

    Thank you.
  • by advocate_one (662832) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:01PM (#23767463)
    no text
  • Threat Assessment (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mykepredko (40154) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:07PM (#23767545) Homepage
    As I understand it, every military in the world assess the threat its opponents pose by their capabilities rather than perceived intents.

    How do you perform a threat assessment in the area of cyber-warfare where the physical weapons (as was pointed out in an earlier post) is the keyboard and mouse with much of technology being used as a threat being developed in the U.S?

    Thanx,

    myke
  • by faloi (738831) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:10PM (#23767597)
    Do you foresee a high utilization of civilian contractors? Knowing that there are some restrictions on people that can be recruited into the Army for any number of reasons (asthma, medications, criminal records), do you see a need for either more lax recruiting guidelines for some of the "front line" troops in the cyber warfare field, or a higher use of civilian (or at least non-Army) personnels?
  • by Digital Ebola (29327) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:14PM (#23767649) Homepage
    Greetings,

    One issue to cyber warfare is linguistics. How does a military unit overcome this? Does the unit consist of people skilled at the various languages used in theater plus the technical concepts required to execute, or are you forced to cooperate with any other agency?

    Also, agency cooperation: are there good relationships between the cyberwarfare units and the intelligence community, and can you say whether or not there are SOPs in place that would utilize cyberwarfare units in conjunction with a physical offensive, i.e. disable Three Gorges Dam right before an op.

    Thanks for the time!
  • Computer Literacy (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AioKits (1235070) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:17PM (#23767717) Homepage
    What level of computer literacy do you feel the Commander-In-Chief and those reporting to them should have in order to comfortably and accurately convey the importance of a given situation/threat the USACEWP encounters?
  • Daemon? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Viking Coder (102287) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:19PM (#23767743)
    Have you read the book "Daemon" [amazon.com] by Leinad Zeraus? Or how about "The Footprints of God" [amazon.com] by Greg Iles?
    Do you think The Singularity is approaching, and if so, do you think you're prepared for it?
  • by Starlet Monroe (512664) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:22PM (#23767811) Journal
    There's a "material" tag on the story pointing out an apparent typo. I can't ever seem to get tags to behave for me, so I'll post a reply instead. In military talk, "materiel" is a specific term to refer to the stuff we need to fight a battle. It has specific and distinct connotations in supply management, and it used correctly in this article's summary.
  • Are We At War? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby (173196) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:27PM (#23767895) Homepage Journal
    What is the "cyber command" doing to protect the US from current serious attacks on major Federal government sites, including the attacks on sensitive Congressional sites [slashdot.org] reported this week?

    Is there any traditional military precedent for tolerating these attacks to the extent we do? Is that hesitancy making us weaker, so our eventual delayed military (or "cyber-military") response will be compromised from winning the conflict to our satisfaction?

    At what point do these attacks constitute acts of war, does that need to be declared by Congress, and how does the "cyber command" change its response at that point?
  • by scorp1us (235526) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:27PM (#23767909) Journal
    We already know that the USAF has a cyber-warfare division. Given that all network attacks are fundamentally based in IP Packets, it stands to reason that the Army and USAF would be duplicating work, while creating an opportunity for lack of communication.

    Would you agree that a special, single cyber-defense branch should be created to assist all branches of the military as well as non-military?

    Generally the armed forces are never known for technical prowess. (They are more consumers than creators) The role of creation comes from contractors. Why shouldn't we rely on contractors to perform these functions when contractors already obtain top-secret clearances? Contractors compete for projects which ensures a level of cost limitation (lets face it, Cost+ rips off the tax payer), continual advancement (beyond what the enemy throws at us).

    Why should the armed forces be doing this in-house?

  • by UncleTogie (1004853) * on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:37PM (#23768087) Homepage Journal

    In your work as Director of IO for Combined Joint Task Force -76, what were your greatest challenges in Afghanistan? What technology threats other than IEDs were your greatest concern?

  • by scorp1us (235526) on Thursday June 12 2008, @01:47PM (#23768215) Journal
    Would you support the release of information and software (Like Security-Enhanced Linux from the NSA) regarding successful defensive configurations and strategies to the general public so that the tax payer can derive additional benefits from your work? Surely the private industries in this country are valuable and may be attacked in order to cause economic harm.

    What limitations or rules would you use for release of such information?
    • however, due to human nature, peace is achieved only with a balance of force, not with an absence of force. In other words, to maintain peace, there will always be a need for armed forces in this world.

      If you think it is possible to have a world where there are no armed forces, you are not adovcating for a peaceful world when you say that. You are in fact unknowingly advocating for a more brutal, injust and violent world. This is so simply because you have not yet made yourself acquainted with, or made peace with (no irony intended), certain ugly but unremovable aspects of fundamental human nature.

      Or, you could try to remove those aspects of human nature in the name of peace. This sets you down the road to autocracy, and makes you an enemy of free will and free expression. If you wish to continue to respect the notion of free will and free expression, you must understand why a force of arms is always necessary to be at the ready, in the name of peace.
        • by rts008 (812749) <rts008@h[ ]ail.com ['otm' in gap]> on Thursday June 12 2008, @04:03PM (#23770343) Journal
          "Animals do not have ego. They never hunt more than they could eat. Period." Citations? Or is this just one of your fantasies made up to support your nonsense?
          Ever watch a mountain lion kill a deer, eat it's fill, then wander off to let the bulk of the deer rot? I have. How about dogs that are not fenced in killing cats for fun, or wildlife? Yep, seen that too...many times. How about the cats killing stuff and bringing it home as a trophy? Yep, all the time again.
          You have no clue here on this subject.

          "Oh, and btw. I don't really care what anyone thinks about it." and (in the same paragraph) "But I'd really love to see more people discussing peace rather than war."
          So, you don't care what anyone else thinks about it, just what you think is important. Right.

          The rest of your clueless diatribe is not even worth discussing, so crawl back into your mom's basement and use some of that internet time to get at least a LITTLE education instead of trolling forums, you will benefit from it tremendously.