On the cyber-security FUD topic

Thu Nov 21 21:04:50 UTC 2002

Here's my contribution to the current cyber-security FUD thread. I've been
mulling this piece over for a while now, and it can certainly apply to a few
different companies in this particluar market. Seeing the current debate, I
feel justified in posting this essay to NANOG.

-rf

Security Through Soundbyte: The 'Cybersecurity Intelligence' Game
Richard Forno

Essay #2002-12

(c) 2002 Richard Forno. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute in
entirety with credit to author.

Full article with in-line URLS is available at:
http://www.infowarrior.org/articles/2002-12.html

Some say that cyberspace is the new battlefield, with its own unique rules,
challenges, and concerns for those charged with defending it.  If one does
consider cyberspace a modern battlefield, intelligence must naturally play a
key role in developing appropriate, proactive defenses. Regarding
battlefield intelligence, military strategist Sun Tzu wrote that "what is
called foreknowledge cannot be elicited from spirits, nor from gods, nor by
analog with past events, nor from calculations. It must be obtained from men
who know the enemy situation."  That's sound advice.

During recent months, hardly a week goes by without some reference to some
firm's findings or statistics on hackers, crackers, cyberterrorists, and the
general state of internet security as they see it.  Many times these reports
are marketed as cybersecurity "intelligence."

As a security professional - and someone 'on the front lines' of the
cyberspace battlefield - I'm both curious and dubious about the whole
'cybersecurity intelligence' business concept, and wonder what it takes to
both become a 'cybersecurity intelligence' expert and make money at it, too.

< - snip - >

Full article with in-line URLS is available at:
http://www.infowarrior.org/articles/2002-12.html