Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Security The Internet The Military United States News Your Rights Online

Pentagon Says Cyberattacks Can Count As Act of War 282

Posted by Soulskill
from the now-we-can-invade-anybody dept.
suraj.sun tips news that the Pentagon has decided computer sabotage originating from another country can be classified as an act of war. "The Pentagon's first formal cyber strategy, unclassified portions of which are expected to become public next month, represents an early attempt to grapple with a changing world in which a hacker could pose as significant a threat to US nuclear reactors, subways or pipelines as a hostile country's military." This news comes only days after the Chinese military admitted the existence of a team of cyberwarriors. "The report will also spark a debate over a range of sensitive issues the Pentagon left unaddressed, including whether the US can ever be certain about an attack's origin, and how to define when computer sabotage is serious enough to constitute an act of war. These questions have already been a topic of dispute within the military."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Pentagon Says Cyberattacks Can Count As Act of War

Comments Filter:
  • treason, too. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by petes_PoV (912422) on Tuesday May 31, 2011 @10:58AM (#36296988)
    If attacking an american military installation via the internet is deemed an act of war, then surely exposing it on such a vulnerable network in the first place must count as treason. I mean, who would knowingly place such a valuable (and apparently, easily accessed) facility that's so vital to the defence of the country, in such danger of attack in the first place?
  • Defense contractors? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by wfstanle (1188751) on Tuesday May 31, 2011 @11:18AM (#36297304)

    The real problem is defense contractors that have all sorts of classified material on their computers. We could spent billions on defense related R&D and some third rate country might get that data and even might destroy our copy of the data while they are at it. Or even better, put a hidden bug in the design that will cause us grief when we try to use it in battle. (Of course, it could remain inactive until it is activated by an enemy.)

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31, 2011 @11:51AM (#36297750)

    Personally I think that any country that hides and shelters a terrorist that kills thousands and thousands of the civilians would be considered an act of war. Pakistan should consider itself lucky that its only got a small slap on the wrist by the USA navy seals.

    You mean like this guy? This is a guy as bad as Osama, but he just happens to cooperate with the CIA and with "US interests". There are 100s of deaths directly linked to him including bombing of a passenger airliner.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Posada_Carriles [wikipedia.org]

    So is this a little inconvenient truth? Or do you stick with your assertions?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31, 2011 @01:07PM (#36298886)

    JSOC and Pakistan have a kind of rules of engagement that if the US knows of an high level terrorist in Pakistan they can "invade" but it must be ABSOLUTELY certain of the address. Address, not street or vicinity, but address. In the agreement Pakistan would disavow any knowledge. This agreement has been in place for a number of years.

    The source is below but can be found in numerous places on the web.

    Source: http://bit.ly/kC9G7q (pages 166 & 167)

Premature optimization is the root of all evil. -- D.E. Knuth

Working...