Meet the Military's Cyber-Security Forces

destinyland writes "How exactly would the military fight a cyber war? In August 2009, the U.S. Air Force activated its new cyberspace combat unit, the 24th Air Force, to 'provide combat-ready forces trained and equipped to conduct sustained cyber operations.' It's commanded by former Minuteman missile and satellite-jamming specialist Major General Richard Webber. (And under his command are two wings, the 688th Information Operations Wing and the 67th Network Warfare Wing, plus a combat communications units.) Meanwhile, to counter the threat of cyber warfare, DARPA is still deploying the National Cyber Range, a test bed of networked computers to test countermeasures against 'cyberwar.' (According to one report, it provides 'a virtual network world — to be populated by mirror computers and inhabited by myriad software sim-people "replicants," and used as a firing range in which to develop the art of cyber warfare.') The Obama administration has even added a military cybersecurity coordinator to the National Security team."

Re:Stop saying cyber

[Orga]

2013: Cyber Unit disbanded after all virtual sims found to be male.

Re:Cyberwarfare?

[Anonymous Coward]

My Dad (age 57) was hired by the NSA at age 52 (MS Comp Sci - Information Assurance). He's now a GS15 and did a year-long stint in the White House OSTP (inter-agency tour). He's heavily involved with defense/threat assessment and is getting ready to go to the "Dark Side" (offense).

He did a ton of drugs in college (35 years ago). He pirates software (now). Somehow he got hired and is moving up the ladder nicely.

Re:Cyberwarfare?

[DerekLyons]

They never did come up with a good answer to how they can recruit the necessary talent when the aforementioned is generally anti-authoritarian.

The same way they recruit very bright people for other specialized fields - they recruit the people who aren't anti-authoritarian, or who are anti-authoritarian but can submerge that enough to get along and do their jobs properly. (The Submarine Service and the various special forces are well stocked with the latter.) It may not appeal to stereotypical 'average Slashdotter', but then that is a fairly small demographic even within the IT world.
 

Everything about this theatre is contrary to conventional military discipline.

Or so goes the meme/stereotype outside the military... In reality, the military knows very well how to handle a wide variety of personality types. Half the guys on my crew (including me) would have been in the brig had we been in the surface Navy rather than the Submarine Force. But our chain-of-command knew well the demands of dealing with the energy of guys in their early to mid twenties with above average intelligence - so long as we did our jobs, didn't endanger ships safety, and didn't cause physical harm... almost the sky was the limit.
 

This is an organization that still believes that only men should be in their little club, gays are bad, and if you're over 30 you're too old. Maybe that works well when you're comparing gun sizes, but in this theatre the groups they're excluding have exactly the human resources such an operation needs: Women are generally able to multitask and see the "big picture" easier than men, gays stereotypically gravitate towards creative endeavors (theatre, graphic design, etc.), and the over 30 crowd has exactly the kind of in-depth understanding of the technology and experience necessary to use it that a bunch of twenty-somethings just can't match, no matter how good the training.

Again with the stereotypes... First off, this is 2010 not 1910. There's been women in the service for decades now. The military 'officially' believes gays are bad because the law requires it, down at the working troop level it's not a problem. And given the number of chiefs and senior offices I knew and know that are over thirty... Well, like the rest of your stereotypes, you're simply wrong.

Re:Cyberwarfare?

[girlintraining]

And it doesn't seem very rational. All of the in/famous hackers I can think of are at least men, and most are Caucasian. DVD John, Kevin Mitnic, Stroustrup, Paul Lutus, Linus Torvalds, Woz, Stall Man, Wall, Knuth, Shimomura, Johnathan James, and Adrian Lamo... And I don't think any of them are homosexual.. Do you have any counter-examples that would alter this perception?

It's a mark of arrogance that just because you don't see them doesn't mean they don't exist. Esther Dyson, Sally Floyd (TCP/IP), Susan Kare, Jeri Ellsworth (C64), Mary Lou Jepsen (CTO of OLPC), Radia Perlman (invented the Spanning Tree Protocol)... and the list goes on.

We aren't visible because this is a male-dominated field -- that doesn't mean the same potentialities don't exist in women, recurring generation after generation, only to perish because society can't find a way to support women in science and technology. Some brave souls do so in spite of the obstacles -- and if they don't make headlines as often, that's no proof against their abilities, but rather social commentary on existing prejudices.

Carefully arranged techno-babble

[Arancaytar]

This summary read like the back cover of a sequel to Neuromancer.

Re:Cyberwarfare?

[DerekLyons]

The military doesn't give a rat fuck about your attitude...

I would gather that you have not been in the military. In my experience, they're confident enough of their service and their statements about it to not resort to terms like "rat fuck". As well, if they honestly do have a problem with someone, it's solved quickly and quietly so they can go back to their drinks.

Well, like the rest of your stereotyping - you're dead wrong. (Again, no surprise.) I was in the USN Submarine service from 81-91. On top of that, the area I live in is a Navy town so I count a large number of active duty, discharged, and retired military among my friends and acquaintances and the same for DoD civilians.
 

(And you also seem to be ignorant of the fact that the military does hire civilians in special cases, and even assigns them to operational and deployed units.)

I didn't mention any of that in my original post, nor do I see it's relevance.

No, you didn't mention it. (But given your general ignorance, I'm not surprised.) It is relevant because you seem to be under the misapprehension that the only way for the military to obtain personnel with special skills is to induct them into uniform.
 

You are attempting to muddy the waters with irrelevant commentary to detract from the fact that you don't like me personally and are throwing irrational argument after irrational argument.

Translation: My mind is made up, don't bother me with facts.
 

And even so, you're still wrong. The military has long waived the age requirements for narrow and specialized fields where civilian experience is desirable and not available among younger people.

Citation aaaand... citation. Care to revise your statement, sir?

I'll go you one better - and cite the actual law of the land [gpo.gov] rather than some third party website.