Re: Why Cyber War Will Not and Should Not Have Its Grand Strategist

[InfoSec News <alerts () infosecnews org>]

Forwarded from: security curmudgeon <jericho (at) attrition.org>

On Wed, 26 Mar 2014, InfoSec News wrote:

: http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/digital/pdf/spring_2014/Libicki.pdf
:
: Strategic Studies Quarterly (SSQ)
: The Strategic Journal of the United States Air Force
: Volume 8, Issue 1 - Spring 2014
: By Martin C. Libicki
:
: Even assuming the cyber domain has yet to stop evolving, it is not clear
: a classic strategic treatment of cyber war is possible, or, if it were,
: it would be particularly beneficial. The salutary effects of such
: classics are limited, the basic facts of cyberspace and cyber war do not
: suggest it would be as revolutionary as airpower has been, and if there
: were a classic on cyber war, it would likely be pernicious.

The subject is interesting, the link to af.mil is intriguing. Oh wait, 
Libicki? I know that name...

   "The following hints may be indicative. Private hackers are more
    likely to use techniques that have been circulating throughout the
    hacker community. While it is not impossible that they have managed to
    generate a novel exploit to take advantage of a hitherto unknown
    vulnerability, they are unlikely to have more than one." -- Martin C.
    Libicki (RAND) 2009


Ah yes! Three years ago, he put forth in an academic paper that "private 
hackers" would only have one zero day. This was patently false in 2000 - 
2002, let alone nine years later. This comment shows his absolute 
disconnect from reality. Based on that, no reason to read this paper 
either.



--
Find the best IT Security talent without breaking your recruiting budget.
Jobs cross-posted to Simply Hired, Facebook and LinkedIn.
Hot InfoSec Jobs - http://www.hotinfosecjobs.com/