In a poll last week, we asked our readers to shed their tough exteriors and share their fears surrounding cyberterrorism.
Asking the question, "How seriously do you take the threat of cyber-terrorism?" here's what we found out:
A plurality of our poll takers (37 percent) -- or those suffering from Shaking In Boots Syndrome (SIBS) -- expressed a grave fear of cyber-terrorism. Still, though, 15 percent say they aren't sure how real cyber-terrorism is, and 17 percent are chalking it up to a simple scare tactic by agenda-pushing vendors and government agencies.
So perhaps to really tackle this issue we have to answer a different question: What is cyber-terrorism anyway?
The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), a bipartisan organization of legislators, defines cyber-terrorism as "the use of information technology
by terrorist groups and individuals to further their agenda... Cyberterrorism can include direct attacks on networks, computer systems,
computer programs, and data, which may result in potentially disastrous
consequences like shutting down vital infrastructure facilities such as
power stations."
Sounds an awful lot like hacking, but the threat of cyber-terrorism is more serious because of terrorists' offline motives. At the risk of giving the terrorists a bright idea, it would be rather crippling if we were cut off from our online networks and computer systems in the event of a major terrorist attack.
As we advance technologically with free-wheeling postings of detailed Google Images of critical infrastructure, we're certainly making it easier for the terrorists types to essentially screw us over. But there are measures in place to nip cyber-terrorist moves in the bud before they take things offline.
For example, in March, The New York Times reported that the U.S. Department of Defense uses the Internet to disrupt terrorists' cyberprojects. According to Brigade General Mark O. Schissler, director of cyberoperations for the Air Force, who is quoted in the article, the simple act of countermessaging terrorists' plans can be very disruptive, since the Web is one of the few safe havens where terrorists can operate.
And, of course, the vendors are getting in on the life-saving action as well. Symantec Corp. (Nasdaq: SYMC), for example, has plenty of software that could save your computer in the event some terrorist wants to come along and blow your life to pieces.
But do we really want to take it that far? I mean, if we buy anti-cyber-terrorism software, does that mean the terrorists win?
I
do not think we need to take it that far but, obviously, businesses will need
the proper business continuity plan in place in the event of any disaster.
As
consumers or web surfers, having some sort of backup and recovery plan such as
backing up data to a DVD should be adequate.
I tend to agree with what you're saying, but this is a big issue. Whether or not to regulate the Internet and what information we post online is a toughie. I tend to think if it's going to keep us out of harm's way there should be some regulation (i.e., restrictions on Google images), but I can assure you that scores of free speech crusaders would disagree. We touched on this a bit in an earlier blog (US Military Bans Google Maps). Basically, what we see right now online is an inconsistency in rules and censorship. In lieu of creating an Internet police state, which nobody really wants, we're taking measures here and there to keep ourselves safe, and hoping for the best.
How do you think these results should be interpreted?
In my opinion, the poll results can be interpreted in two different ways. On one hand, more poll takers voted for "Very worried" than any of the other choices, which could possibly indicate that most people are in fact worried about cyberterrorism. On the other hand, only 37% of the poll takers are actually worried and the rest of them (63%) don't think so, and if we look at it this way, the results might as well say the opposite. Personally, I'd prefer a "yes or no" poll or a poll with scale for this to a multiple choice.
Anyway, I think the largest percentage voted for "Very worried" probably has a lot to do with the term "Terrorism" itself. I think now we tend to associate this term with our feeling or experience about tragic terrorist attacks that had happened in real life.
If there could be potentially disastrous consequences from cyberterrorism, make no mistake... Murphy's law could in fact come in handy here... "Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong". So it's best to be prepared.
I'm shacking in my pants with grave fear. Maybe we should not worry about Cyber-Terrorism as Symantec Corp. like companies can protect us with their "plenty of software that could save your computer in the event some terrorist wants to come along and blow your life to pieces". But remember the virus "ILOVEYOU" on May, 4 2000 when "over a five-hour period, this virus spread across Asia, Europe and the United States via e-mail messages. The menace clogged Web servers, overwrote personal files and caused corporate IT managers to shut down e-mail systems." Computers and servers at that time were protected against viruses and malwares. But a simple hacker succeeded in threating many IT experts. This was not Cyber-Terrorism, but we can imagine what could happen if a cyber attack became successful. I don't want to be alarmist, but I do think like many others that Cyber-Terrorism is a real threat and there should be regulation to limit things such Google posting images of critical infrastructures. We can enjoy our freedom to information only if our security is guaranteed.
Internet Evolution RSS Updates Want to stay up to date on the topics covered in this article? Use the links below to subscribe to our topical RSS feeds:
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
We hope you can tune in for an IE Radio interview today with a true industry innovator, Jeff Jonas, chief scientist at IBM. We're talking to Jonas today at 3:00 p.m. ET. Do. Not. Miss. It.
Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL)'s recent unveiling of its "magical" iPad may have fanboys counting the days until March, but if a recent poll on Internet Evolution is any indication, not everyone is buying into the hype.
We do a lot of grousing here on Internet Evolution, and usually for good reason, considering the amount of nonsense that keeps this industry afloat on its cloud of hot steamy air!!!! But... we can still happily acknowledge those titans who have succeeded in leading the way or paving new ground in their respective fields and, in turn, give credit when it is well deserved.
The Wall Street Journal reports that the National Security Agency (NSA) has been working with Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) to look into the attacks on its Chinese servers.
Smarter Collaboration: How to Thrive in a Challenging Business Environment Market conditions are changing faster than ever, and organizations need to improve their agility and adaptability in order to provide better service and improve processes. The ability to work with customers, business partners, and employees as effectively as possible - while at the same time holding down costs - is a key to success. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
As enterprises leap into the Web 2.0 world of blogging, commenting, and social networking, just 'being there' won't deliver ROI. You may want a 'Web Evangelist' to systematically harvest the feedback in order to polish your product or service.
What can users today do to protect their online privacy? The simplest and most obvious option is to not use the Internet – at all. However, once all digital information is consolidated over the Internet, trying to protect digital identity by simply unplugging from the Internet becomes impossible – a fact that has manifest implications for civil liberties, Saunders says.
By 2011 the number of Internet-connected sensors will exceed 1 trillion, making your chances of doing anything or going anywhere unnoticed pretty much zero. Saunders talks about how the 'sensortization' of the Internet is eliminating the traditional divide between online and offline populations.
The 20th Century Internet was characterized by the ability to interact with other people and information on the Internet largely without anyone knowing who you were. The Internet of this century, conversely, will be defined by identity. Saunders explains how Internet users are unwittingly contributing to the demise of the anonymous Internet.
More companies are trolling social networks to find and vet potential job candidates. Beware the pitfalls of blurring the line between personal and professional lives.
Data mining of social networks means people might face unforeseen consequences as a result of their seemingly innocuous personal choices and associations.
Some of the "cool" people are testing a new Web service: Blippy. It could be a great data source for corporations to glean info about customers’ credit card purchases. But it has all sorts of possible privacy and security problems. Buyer beware!
Saunders is wrong on Hulu, Fritz thinks. By most measures it's been
a success, and there's no reason this model won't become even bigger in the next three years. Oh, and he hates Steve's hat.
Research shows that the youth of today like Facebook – but not blogging or Twitter. Does that mean Facebook has won, or just that it's not yet out of favor? Will all the services we see today fade into Ovaltine-or-Wheaties status in just a few years?
What kinds of companies are doing the most innovation in the data center? Turns out it's midtier enterprises that are taking the "Just Right" approach.
Ray Kurzweil's Blio and Apple's iPad tablet will make it easier than ever to have books "read" to us, says Dr. Kim, who believes that talking tablets will become interwoven into our consciousness as we "merge" with the increasingly elegant machines we hold in our hands.
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Email This
TWEET THIS
