http://ctovision.disqus.com/CTOvision.com is for the enterprise CTO enSun, 25 Jan 2009 10:00:18 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-21538830<p>AJ I'm with you on that, and I also think you invoke a good analogy when you mention aerospace. In that particular battlespace the analogy is good because in aerospace the country could dominate for 50 years because of strong partnerships with industry. We won WWII and the Cold War for lots of reasons including brave people but also because industry could out produce more technologically advanced capabilities than our adversaries. I hope the same will be true in cyber. To do so, maybe we need to treat our cyber industry with the same respect and partnership we treated our aerospace industry?<br>Cheers,<br>Bob</p>Bob GourleySun, 25 Jan 2009 10:00:18 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-731044538<p>AJ I&amp;#039m with you on that, and I also think you invoke a good analogy when you mention aerospace. In that particular battlespace the analogy is good because in aerospace the country could dominate for 50 years because of strong partnerships with industry. We won WWII and the Cold War for lots of reasons including brave people but also because industry could out produce more technologically advanced capabilities than our adversaries. I hope the same will be true in cyber. To do so, maybe we need to treat our cyber industry with the same respect and partnership we treated our aerospace industry?<br>Cheers,<br>Bob</p>Bob GourleySun, 25 Jan 2009 08:00:18 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-373949292<p>AJ I&amp;#039m with you on that, and I also think you invoke a good analogy when you mention aerospace. In that particular battlespace the analogy is good because in aerospace the country could dominate for 50 years because of strong partnerships with industry. We won WWII and the Cold War for lots of reasons including brave people but also because industry could out produce more technologically advanced capabilities than our adversaries. I hope the same will be true in cyber. To do so, maybe we need to treat our cyber industry with the same respect and partnership we treated our aerospace industry? <br>Cheers, <br>Bob</p>Bob GourleySun, 25 Jan 2009 08:00:18 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-21538828<p>Bob, good article. I see the real challenge as developing a Cyber Policy that frames the threat. Newton's III law of motion of every action having an equal and opposite reaction is seen every day online. Do we try to leap ahead to a point where true technological dominance is gained such as that which we have in aerospace and other battle spaces, or do we do a tit-for-tat fight like what we've seen with our more recent counter insurgency operations in low intensity conflicts? Either way, I applaud any government action that recognizes that we may already be losing ground in this conflict and must immediately address it by combining industry and government resources.<br>aj</p>AJ ClarkSat, 24 Jan 2009 18:44:23 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-731044535<p>Bob, good article. I see the real challenge as developing a Cyber Policy that frames the threat. Newton&amp;#039s III law of motion of every action having an equal and opposite reaction is seen every day online. Do we try to leap ahead to a point where true technological dominance is gained such as that which we have in aerospace and other battle spaces, or do we do a tit-for-tat fight like what we&amp;#039ve seen with our more recent counter insurgency operations in low intensity conflicts? Either way, I applaud any government action that recognizes that we may already be losing ground in this conflict and must immediately address it by combining industry and government resources.<br>aj</p>AJ ClarkSat, 24 Jan 2009 16:44:23 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-373949293<p>Bob, good article. I see the real challenge as developing a Cyber Policy that frames the threat. Newton&amp;#039s III law of motion of every action having an equal and opposite reaction is seen every day online. Do we try to leap ahead to a point where true technological dominance is gained such as that which we have in aerospace and other battle spaces, or do we do a tit-for-tat fight like what we&amp;#039ve seen with our more recent counter insurgency operations in low intensity conflicts? Either way, I applaud any government action that recognizes that we may already be losing ground in this conflict and must immediately address it by combining industry and government resources. <br>aj</p>AJ ClarkSat, 24 Jan 2009 16:44:23 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-21538826<p>Jeffrey, thanks for bringing attention to these important operational cyber matters.<br>Cheers,<br>Bob</p>Bob GourleySat, 24 Jan 2009 11:35:59 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-731044533<p>Jeffrey, thanks for bringing attention to these important operational cyber matters.<br>Cheers,<br>Bob</p>Bob GourleySat, 24 Jan 2009 09:35:59 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-373949291<p>Jeffrey, thanks for bringing attention to these important operational cyber matters. <br>Cheers, <br>Bob</p>Bob GourleySat, 24 Jan 2009 09:35:59 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-21538825<p>Hey Bob, thanks for the pointer to my Kyrgyz cyber attack post. The investigation is ongoing and I hope to have some conclusions posted soon.</p>JeffreyFri, 23 Jan 2009 16:27:24 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-731044532<p>Hey Bob, thanks for the pointer to my Kyrgyz cyber attack post. The investigation is ongoing and I hope to have some conclusions posted soon.</p>JeffreyFri, 23 Jan 2009 14:27:24 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-373949289<p>Hey Bob, thanks for the pointer to my Kyrgyz cyber attack post. The investigation is ongoing and I hope to have some conclusions posted soon.</p>JeffreyFri, 23 Jan 2009 14:27:24 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-21538824<p>Thanks Bob, I appreciate that and agree totally. This is going to take leadership and resources. If the government tracked its IT investments in a way that would let us calculate the value of current "legacy" computer systems it might be on the order of $500B or so. Do we want to replace all that right away so it can be more secure? That isn't in the budget. Even just making this old stuff more secure (not replacing it) will be costly. But it needs to be done.</p>Bob GourleyFri, 23 Jan 2009 11:09:53 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-21538823<p>I like the 6 points. I fully agree that we need to move faster. Alas, I'm not optimistic things can be "fixed" very rapidly, UNLESS there is a huge infusion of cash for the efforts. And that cash has to go to all involved in the fight. I've said all along that the government is not partnering enough with industry on these undertakings. There are many companies that would love to help out, but most of those same companies are struggling, and will have little to devote to this on their own. Some organization from the top (Fed CTO?) would be good, but this is really going to take some grass roots efforts by lots of folks.</p>BobFri, 23 Jan 2009 10:33:11 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-731044530<p>Thanks Bob, I appreciate that and agree totally. This is going to take leadership and resources. If the government tracked its IT investments in a way that would let us calculate the value of current "legacy" computer systems it might be on the order of $500B or so. Do we want to replace all that right away so it can be more secure? That isn&amp;#039t in the budget. Even just making this old stuff more secure (not replacing it) will be costly. But it needs to be done.</p>ctovisionFri, 23 Jan 2009 09:09:53 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-373949288<p>Thanks Bob, I appreciate that and agree totally. This is going to take leadership and resources. If the government tracked its IT investments in a way that would let us calculate the value of current "legacy" computer systems it might be on the order of $500B or so. Do we want to replace all that right away so it can be more secure? That isn&amp;#039t in the budget. Even just making this old stuff more secure (not replacing it) will be costly. But it needs to be done.</p>ctovisionFri, 23 Jan 2009 09:09:53 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-731044528<p>I like the 6 points. I fully agree that we need to move faster. Alas, I&amp;#039m not optimistic things can be "fixed" very rapidly, UNLESS there is a huge infusion of cash for the efforts. And that cash has to go to all involved in the fight. I&amp;#039ve said all along that the government is not partnering enough with industry on these undertakings. There are many companies that would love to help out, but most of those same companies are struggling, and will have little to devote to this on their own. Some organization from the top (Fed CTO?) would be good, but this is really going to take some grass roots efforts by lots of folks.</p>BobFri, 23 Jan 2009 08:33:11 -0000http://www.ctovision.com/2009/01/the-future-of-cyber-security-and-cyber-conflict/#comment-373949287<p>I like the 6 points. I fully agree that we need to move faster. Alas, I&amp;#039m not optimistic things can be "fixed" very rapidly, UNLESS there is a huge infusion of cash for the efforts. And that cash has to go to all involved in the fight. I&amp;#039ve said all along that the government is not partnering enough with industry on these undertakings. There are many companies that would love to help out, but most of those same companies are struggling, and will have little to devote to this on their own. Some organization from the top (Fed CTO?) would be good, but this is really going to take some grass roots efforts by lots of folks.</p>BobFri, 23 Jan 2009 08:33:11 -0000