Pentagon Plans New Arm to Wage Wars in Cyberspace
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon plans to create a new military command for cyberspace, administration officials said Thursday, stepping up preparations by the armed forces to conduct both offensive and defensive computer warfare.
The military command would complement a civilian effort to be announced by President Obama on Friday that would overhaul the way the United States safeguards its computer networks.
Mr. Obama, officials said, will announce the creation of a White House office — reporting to both the National Security Council and the National Economic Council — that will coordinate a multibillion-dollar effort to restrict access to government computers and protect systems that run the stock exchanges, clear global banking transactions and manage the air traffic control system.
White House officials say Mr. Obama has not yet been formally presented with the Pentagon plan. They said he would not discuss it Friday when he announced the creation of a White House office responsible for coordinating private-sector and government defenses against the thousands of cyberattacks mounted against the United States — largely by hackers but sometimes by foreign governments — every day.
But he is expected to sign a classified order in coming weeks that will create the military cybercommand, officials said. It is a recognition that the United States already has a growing number of computer weapons in its arsenal and must prepare strategies for their use — as a deterrent or alongside conventional weapons — in a wide variety of possible future conflicts.
The White House office will be run by a “cyberczar,” but because the position will not have direct access to the president, some experts said it was not high-level enough to end a series of bureaucratic wars that have broken out as billions of dollars have suddenly been allocated to protect against the computer threats.
The main dispute has been over whether the Pentagon or the National Security Agency should take the lead in preparing for and fighting cyberbattles. Under one proposal still being debated, parts of the N.S.A. would be integrated into the military command so they could operate jointly.
Officials said that in addition to the unclassified strategy paper to be released by Mr. Obama on Friday, a classified set of presidential directives is expected to lay out the military’s new responsibilities and how it coordinates its mission with that of the N.S.A., where most of the expertise on digital warfare resides today.
The decision to create a cybercommand is a major step beyond the actions taken by the Bush administration, which authorized several computer-based attacks but never resolved the question of how the government would prepare for a new era of warfare fought over digital networks.
It is still unclear whether the military’s new command or the N.S.A. — or both — will actually conduct this new kind of offensive cyberoperations.
The White House has never said whether Mr. Obama embraces the idea that the United States should use cyberweapons, and the public announcement on Friday is expected to focus solely on defensive steps and the government’s acknowledgment that it needs to be better organized to face the threat from foes attacking military, government and commercial online systems.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has pushed for the Pentagon to become better organized to address the security threat.
Initially at least, the new command would focus on organizing the various components and capabilities now scattered across the four armed services.
Officials declined to describe potential offensive operations, but said they now viewed cyberspace as comparable to more traditional battlefields.
“We are not comfortable discussing the question of offensive cyberoperations, but we consider cyberspace a war-fighting domain,“ said Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman. “We need to be able to operate within that domain just like on any battlefield, which includes protecting our freedom of movement and preserving our capability to perform in that environment.”
Although Pentagon civilian officials and military officers said the new command was expected to initially be a subordinate headquarters under the military’s Strategic Command, which controls nuclear operations as well as cyberdefenses, it could eventually become an independent command.
“No decision has been made,” said Lt. Col. Eric Butterbaugh, a Pentagon spokesman. “Just as the White House has completed its 60-day review of cyberspace policy, likewise, we are looking at how the department can best organize itself to fill our role in implementing the administration’s cyberpolicy.”
The creation of the cyberczar’s office inside the White House appears to be part of a significant expansion of the role of the national security apparatus there. A separate group overseeing domestic security, created by President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11 attacks, now resides within the National Security Council. A senior White House official responsible for countering the proliferation of nuclear and unconventional weapons has been given broader authority. Now, cybersecurity will also rank as one of the key threats that Mr. Obama is seeking to coordinate from the White House.
The strategy review Mr. Obama will discuss on Friday was completed weeks ago, but delayed because of continuing arguments over the authority of the White House office, and the budgets for the entire effort.
It was kept separate from the military debate over whether the Pentagon or the N.S.A. is best equipped to engage in offensive operations. Part of that debate hinges on the question of how much control should be given to American spy agencies, since they are prohibited from acting on American soil.
“It’s the domestic spying problem writ large,” one senior intelligence official said recently. “These attacks start in other countries, but they know no borders. So how do you fight them if you can’t act both inside and outside the United States?”
John Markoff contributed reporting from San Francisco.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
20 Comments so far
Show AllThis so called command by a czar is one more way through which the government takes away the freedoms of the American public. Now any citizen can be locked up under the guise of threat to national security. Of course these laws will not be applicable to Chinese and Russian hackers.
First, the word czar is a Soviet Empire variation of the title Caesar --- which means Emperor.
Now that GWOT is losing believability and its ‘fear factor’ is fading, Obama TV presents GWON --- the “new and improved”, fear inducing, and liberty reducing, global war on networks!
Obama is polishing the Apple of Empire for his off-screen overlords, financial patrons, and only constituency, by announcing a network czar/emperor:
While SUN Microsystems famously, and humanitarianly said, "The Network is the Solution", now the global ruling-elite 'corporate financial Empire' posing behind the facade of their two-party, 'Vichy' sham of democracy has arrogantly, aggressively, and imperially pronounced for itself (in secret) that, "The Network is the Battlefield."
The age of enlightenment that birthed the American Revolution seems to have come to an end, and the "new age of enlightenment" that George Lakoff so looked forward to in his fabulous "The Political Mind" has been strangled in its crib by an inhuman new age of technological Empire, thinly veiled behind the fading image of the once proud American democratic Republic.
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
Wonderful, what a sane government the US has and what a great way to spend money. I'm sure that all of your children too will enjoy paying for this, along with adventures in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the way things are going, North Korea.
There's a war on drugs, terrorism, space, piracy off of Somalia, and now the Internet. What will they think of next?
A war on more or less anything that the Pentagon doesn't like?
Just speculating here. I have worked with IBM people who come out of the military. Not too creative or talented, frankly. Unless the development is in the hands of Navy women (smile), I predict that any software project that is done by the military will be similar to IBM amd Microsoft paradigms and therefore:
1. Expensive
2. Incompatible with existing systems
3. Missing development deadlines
4. Full of errors in design and execution
5. Cumbersome
6. Plagued by extensive duplicated paperwork
7. Plagued with cost overruns, very expensive
8. Will start out of date and finish waaaaay out of date
There will be lots of Powerpoint presentations along the way. (see Tufte, The Cognitive Style of Powerpoint).
However, the "Spitzer Factor" is likely to work. That is the ability to write scripts to mine information related to domestic targets. An Oracle database may be chosen, since that company has become close to some of the old Bushies.
As far as censoring the internet, I believe that Google, for one, has already gone from an idealistic open philosophy enterprise to a company that is an instrument of massive data gathering and cooperation with marketers and "security" people. The groundwork for that censorship has been laid.
Anyone know where we can buy carrier pigeons?
Joe
the loons at Defense are still using microsoft's garbage, partly because of microsoft bribery, and mostly because they are stupid.
I think Microsoft is a large part of the problem.
It is the their networking software that has so many holes, it is impossible to secure.
You are much safer even if you have a PC to use email which is much safer than any commercial network.
There were Air Force personnel in my class trying to learn the Microsoft way and all they heard was how easy it is to hack.
Nothing is fool proof with computers but non internet networks, especially Microsoft are the easiest to hack and bring down.
Fewer people use MicroSloth every day. The open source community is far better at closing holes and checking threats.
This whole pentagram charade is just setting the stage for another false flag operation.
"DEAR CITIZENS.
TODAY CYBERTERRORISTS ATTACKED THE U.S.
AS A RESULT, WE ARE SHUTTING DOWN THE INTERNET AND DECLARING MARTIAL LAW; TAKING AWAY YOUR FREEDOMS, TO PROTECT THEM.
DON'T WORRY, THIS WAR WILL LAST TEN YEARS JUST LIKE ALL THE OTHER FAKE WARS WE INVENT, LIKE THE WARS AGAINST DRUGS AND OIL BOOGIEMEN.
YOU, OF COURSE WILL PAY FOR IT.
SIGNED,
BIG BROTHER
P.S: KEEP THE "TELESCREEN" ON SO WE CAN WATCH WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
I can hear it now, the next 911 will be called a cyber terrorism attack on us by us. But not to be held accountable by us.
"Today cyber hacker terrorists, hacked in to the national defense and launched a nuclear missile at NY city."
"We know it was hackers in IRAN trained by operatives in Japan."
"So now we must invade IRAN to protect America."
sneaker and bystander: nailed it in one.
Considering Russia and China have at least a ten year head start at this and are coordinated, expect many fumbles, gaffes, & clumsy repression of domestic opponents.
The only command of Cyber Command will be to shut down the Internet to suppress the truth about whatever war criminal actions the Pentagoons are committing.
There is no question in my mind that this is the first step towards that outcome.
Currently they control the media through restriction of access (only those who play along get access). Or the media is owned by the corporations which own our government.
The last frontier of freedom is the Internet so it must be controlled.
Exactly, as I've mentioned on other threads, the US will use the rationale of "security" to censor the internet, just as China and others have. The greatest fear of US elites is democracy, which is why they've tried to make it as "safe" as possible.
Oh goody, more ways to wage war. We humans sure are smart!
The war is against us.
No kidding.
Yahoo!
Only about 10 years behind Russia and China. Most advanced military in the world eh?
Sorry ZMANN, just because the media is only now reporting this, does not negate the "possibility" that we have had several types of weapons in space for many years. Read up on SPARWAR. Gee, I wonder what happens when 'communications' microwave busts cross paths form three or more satellites with the point of intercept calulated to within an inch or so? Just a passing point to ponder.
Erm, this article isn't about weapons in space.