The horrific terrorist attacks in Mumbai have ended, and the media has discussed technologies employed by the terrorists: BlackBerries and satellite phones, GPS, VoIP, Google Earth, etc. But this is already terrorism of the past. The future of terrorism includes sabotaged electronic devices, killer "hobbyist" drones, superior satellite imaging, and even government/terrorist-controlled flash mobs.
Today's military products are tomorrow's commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) hardware and software, says Gordon Housworth, head of the management consulting and technology services firm Intellectual Capital Group and a former member of the intelligence community. Terrorists can "climb the back of COTS products," he notes. That could mean, for example, using readily available hobbyist components and kits to construct a variety of remote controlled (RC) planes, helicopters, rockets, and boats.
Instead of spending millions of dollars on a single U.S. military drone, RC devices costing anywhere from hundreds to a few thousand dollars could carry several pounds of plastic explosive (C-4). The devices could be remotely controlled with RF or programmed via GPS and flown into people or buildings, says Jim Opfer, head of the mobile and computer consulting firm, Launch Power. Opfer, an RC enthusiast, was an Air Force colonel in charge of modernizing fixed and mobile communications at the White House during President Reagan's administration.
Many security experts are concerned that the Mumbai terrorists (among others) used Google Earth to plot attacks. The Indian government and other governments want to ban Google Earth or force it to remove photographic images of sensitive locations. Interestingly, various government security forces have used Google Earth for their own purposes, although they don't advertise that fact.
Indeed, India is complaining about Google Earth, but it plans to compete against it! The Indian space agency plans to discern images that are much smaller than Google's. I wouldn't be surprised if the images could be viewed, eventually, on cellphones.
Meanwhile, Google is purchasing the rights
to images for Google Earth and Google Maps from the GeoEye-1 satellite that was launched in September. The satellite can photograph images as small as 16.5 inches, but Google will be able to use images that are "only" no smaller than 19.6 inches. Google Earth and Google Maps -- with "street view" -- are now available for viewing on many cellular phones.
If Google's maps aren't good enough, terrorists could create their own using an RC plane containing a Nokia N95 5-megapixel camera phone and the images viewed with Pict'Earth software, as described in the Nokia N95 Blog. Perhaps they could build an RC plane using a Windows Mobile phone and transmit GPS-tagged MMS photos.
Terrorists -- and governments -- could employ flash mobs by issuing a call over Twitter or SMS for hundreds or thousands of people to riot. Twitter also could be used to avoid police. Interestingly, more despotic governments, such as those in Burma and China, would be more able to shut down cellular traffic with impunity compared to democratic nations that would face greater wrath from citizens, Housworth notes.
Governments will increase pressure on ISPs, cellular operators, and software developers to enable easier tapping into communications. Skype is alleged to have a backdoor into its VoIP service, such as that for Austria, and Germany supposedly is trying to hack into the service.
India wanted to readResearch In Motion Ltd. (RIM) (Nasdaq: RIMM; Toronto: RIM) BlackBerry data, but RIM refused. India says it won't ban BlackBerries, but will the Mumbai attacks make government more insistent about reading data?
The U.S. military is extremely concerned about the use of wireless Internet tools by terrorists. Perhaps even more troubling than anything I've discussed is inserting malicious code into electronic devices while they are being manufactured. Counterfeit hardware with possible backdoors
have been discovered. Imagine what could be done with infected firmware and software used in wired and wireless Internet devices designated for power plants, chemical factories, etc.
The attacks in Mumbai are merely the harbingers of what's to come using Internet hardware and software. The future appears much bleaker.
I certainly agree that certain technologies that help the "good guys" locate and stop terrorists should be kept secret. One interesting aspect of an information war is how off-the-shelf products can be turned into weapons and how technology filters down so that almost anyone can afford it -- for good or evil.
Yes, modern terroristic attacks are planned by small groups of people. It is hard to identify and forecast them. However, there is always something behind these groups, some idea, target, standard way of behavior which are not so hard to be determined. This is I think the task of Special Forces, which use new technologies.
Terrorism is the universal weapon of 21 century. It is not a secret that we live in epoch of local conflicts in which terrorism plays an important role. That is why, in my view, the more we talk about it, the more we try to understand it and its bases, the more right solution we can find in order to create the most effective methods of withstanding this disease.
I think, that one of main task of antiterrorist organizations it to preserve technologies in a secret. This is to my mind tightly connected with “information war”. We live in a democratic society and I am not telling that information should be kept in a secret, but what I mean is that methods of military and Special Forces should be much more secret. Today’s situation is not defined by technologies, laser target definition and spy satellites.
Information and disinformation define it.
(I will be waiting for your answer to my email, Alan, thank you)
Yes, we continue to develop increasingly advanced technology that can be used for good and evil. (Check out this new cellphone!)
Technology has lots of uses in fighting terrorism, but it's certainly not a panacea. Small groups of people (or even an individual) can plan terrorist acts in secret and it's not easy to detect.
(By the way, I got your e-mail and I'll respond with comments.)
Firstly, almost all modern action movies show several ways of possible terroristic attacks and give terrorist an excellent chance to forecast actions of military and police. Let’s remember Negotiator.
Secondly, every day we can read in the media about the new weapon or new spy satellite.
Thirdly, modern terroristic organizations are well funded and use the most recent weapon and advanced technologies.
The only question I always ask myself is how, when our governments spend huge amount of money for the fight with terrorism, when our military engineers design spy satellites with high definition, when we have the variety of types of antiterrorist organizations and fight with terrorism in Chechnya, Iraq, and Afghanistan, terrorist, without any problems, plan and implements attacks?
Oops. Thanks for pointing it out. I corrected the link. Yes, that's the article to which I was referring.
Terrorism, technology, privacy, civil liberties, domestic security, etc. -- no easy solutions. Lots of give and take. Monitoring of Internet communications has been occurring for a long time.
The big question is how much freedom should we give up in exchange for security -- especially when we don't know whether giving up liberties will make any significant difference. No hard and fast rules about this.
The only definite conclusion is technology will play an increasingly important role in terrorism -- for terrorists and security forces.
The link in your post appears to not work for me. I assume you are referring to this post in The Guardian.
Yes, Terrorism is a multifaceted, complex, and very difficult to resolve. There is no single solution, but one thing nations can do is look at their domestic and international policies and determine whether there are any detrimental aspects that affect groups of people (at home or abroad).
Terrorism brings awareness to a cause. It may not bring about change, but it definitely brings awareness - negative and positive.
Terrorism is using technology to not only plan attacks, but fund them as well. That being said, I think there is a greater opportunity for law enforcement agencies to identify and gather intelligence. Online activity does leave traces.
The battle between intelligence gathering and privacy will continue to grow. On one hand, I understand the privacy advocates concerns. On the other hand, I know that I'm not doing anything that I fear will be spied upon, so perhaps I could give up a little privacy for a little security. That works, of course, until the people providing the security become the terrorists themselves.
I agree -- removing one tool or many doesn't stop terrorism, as I've been writing in these comments. Terrorism is very complicated. There are many reasons for its existence and the politics can be extremely complicated.
Arundhati Roy, who authored The God of Small Things, wrote a detailed (and long) article in The Guardian about the political complications of the Mumbai attacks. Roy is a political activist and many people don't agree with her views. However, the article at least highlights the complications.
I completely agree with you, as I've written in these comments. There are all sorts of methods terrorists may use, and Google Earth is only one tool. And, as you've noted, should we shut down every technology that terrorists could possibly use?
No, the solution is being smart. We need to understand the technologies (both advanced and basic) that are available and use them to help defeat/reduce terrorism. Moreover, if one country shuts down a tool that terrorists use, another country might create it as a "business opportunity," just as India plans to develop a competitor to Google Earth.
If the United States would completely shut down the GPS network, there's still Russia's GLONASS and China's Beidou (although neither system is the same as the U.S. network).
I'm afraid I strong disagree with your contention that we need to shut down or degrade Google Earth. As I've written in these comments, there are alternatives to Google Earth. We can't destroy everything that will help terrorists. As I've also written, that would mean we'd shut down GPS, cellular phones, VoIP, boats, cars, etc.
There are all sorts of ways to plot terrorist attacks. If Google Earth is shut down, do you think terrorism will end? Indeed, if Google Earth is shut down there are many other ways to map terrain, including plain old paper maps.
Restricting Google Earth is the wrong solution. We need to use technology that exists to defeat terrorism, not shut it down.
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.
It is difficult to underestimate the value of wireless data in Haiti in aiding relief workers and residents in wake of the 7.0 magnitude earthquake that hit the country on January 12. Quite literally, wireless data has been a life-saving technology.
I'm cautiously optimistic that Apple's iPad will be successful because it's Apple-like and non-Apple-like. Those characteristics have major advantages and disadvantages that affect the value of the iPad. UPDATED 12:25 PM
May the gods be praised! Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) has finally unveiled what appears to be its online file storage capability -- a so-called Google Drive or GDrive -- for consumers and businesses.
Hysteria has reached fever pitch as techies around the world can hardly contain themselves until January 27, when Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL) is rumored to be announcing its new tablet computer. Also, during the past several months, interesting tablets and concepts for tablets have been unveiled by other manufacturers. The New York Times has called 2010 "The Year of the Tablet."
In Charles Dickens's classic story A Christmas Carol, Ebenezer Scrooge asks the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come about scenes he will be shown from his future: "Are these the shadows of the things that will be, or are they shadows of things that may be, only?"
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.
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.
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!
Google spent a lot of time developing its Nexus One phone. Too bad it didn't spend enough time developing customer support mechanisms. Existing purchasers and potential customers are complaining about awful support for the "Google Phone." And business-ready? No way, says Alan.
Tom wants a Google 'unlocked handset' for the holidays because he thinks they could just break the telco monopoly on handset distribution and thus empower the Internet as the driver of mobile broadband now and forever.
Techies are going crazy over the possibility that Google might design and sell its own Android phone. Some writers say it's a very big deal. Reiter questions whether it will happen and, if it does, whether it even matters.
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.
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Email This
TWEET THIS
