E-Commerce Week 8 Case Study Presentation
Difference between Hacking and Cyberwarfare
Understanding & Emergence of Cyberwarfare
Potential Devastation of Cyberwar
The Dynamics of Cyberwar in Global Community
THE E-COMMERCE SECURITY ENVIRONMENT
VIRTUAL WAR • A form of war among organizations, states and societies carried out over the internet
NOT JUST HACKING • Not just hacking, or breaking and entering the inside system and database management that • Influence governments, business and nation/state’s operation
SERIOUS THREATS • Much more serious threat to those stakeholders who rely on the internet for daily operations.
Violent or Potentially Violent • all acts of war are violent or potentially violent
Instrumental and Physical Violence • an act of war is always instrumental: physical violence or the threat of force is a means to compel the enemy to accept the attacker's will
Political Goal or Intention • Finally, to qualify as an act of war, an attack must have some kind of political goal or intention.
Deception, Fraud and Financial Theft Actions • Many hackers are after money, concentrating on identify theft and other frauds that have allowed them to steal tens of millions of dollars
ď ŽThree key points of vulnerability in e-commerce &egovernment environment: 1. Client 2. Server 3. Communications pipeline (Internet
VULNERABLE POINTS IN AN E-COMMERCE TRANSACTION
CYBER-SPACE â€“ THE FINAL FRONTIER Considered the newest domain of warfare Civilian vs. Civilian (Cyber-Crime) Civilian vs. State State vs. Civilian State vs. State
RELEVANT EXPERTISES FOR CYBERWAR
IT, Network security, Network ops, Cryptography, IDS, Vulnerability Asessment DDOS, worm defense
Business, Economics, Management Science, Organizational Psychology
Military Strategy, Military History, International Relations, Strategic & Defense
TOOLS TO OPERATE AND EXECUTE CYBERWAR
CYBERWAR OFFENCES US-China Case • Google Titan Rain Part II Case in 2010 between China and United States.
Cyber-Command By Pentagon • A war game, Cyber Storm II conducted by the Department of Homeland Security in 2008
MAD 2.0 • Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) 2.0 to destroy the Internet infrastructure of the attacker.
THE OCCURRENCE S OF CYBERWAR IN THE WORLD
CYBERCRIME TO CYBERWARFARE
EMERGENCE OF INTER-STATE CYBERWAR
THE WORKING MECHANISM OF CYBERWAR : STUXNET
CYBERWARFARE BETWEEN HAMAS & ISRAEL
EMERGING CYBERWARFARE IN 2013
CYBERDEFENSE & CYBERSECURITY
MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION CYBER OFFENSIVE ACTION • Cyber offensive actions to destroy the Internet infrastructure of the aggressors. • MAD 2.0 • Pose a serious and increasing threat to international security.
DESTRUCTION INTER STATES • Destruction of the Internet among a large group of nations. • Organizations must improve their ability to collect and transmit digital evidence, especially to international partners.
DEWL • For the long term, national security planners should try to create a Distant Early Warning Line(DEWL)for cyber war, and the capability to select from arrange of rapid response tactics.
THREATS & SOLUTION What ?
10% of the world’s computers .
Reported that 25% of computers have malware within UK.
Users unintentionally installed by opening e-mail attachments .
China, 50% have been resolved by malware program.
Result of using pirated “free” software.
Computers server and client
Operating system security enhancements
Channel of communications
Implementation plan • Security organization • Access controls • Authentication procedures, biometrics
SHIFTING PARADIGM OF MILITARY FORCES
DEFENSE MECHANISM – DATA CENTRE SECURITY
DEFENSE MECHANISM – CUSTOM DEFENSE
OTHER MECHANISM : SOFT POWER DIPLOMACY
1. 2. 3. 4.
UNITED NATIONS’S ROLE INTERNATIONAL TELLECOMUNICATION UNION INTERNATIONAL LEADERS SUMMIT INTERNATIONAL YOUTHS COLLABORATION
REFERENCES 1. Lifland, A. (2012). Cyberwar. Harvard International Review, 33(4), 7-8. 2. Rid, T. (2013). Cyberwar and Peace. Foreign Affairs, 92(6), 77-87.
3. Chandrashekar, J., Orrin, S., Livadas, C., Schooler, M. E., (2009). The dark cloud : Undersatnding and defending against botnets and stealthy malware. Journal of Intel Technology. Vol. 13. Iss 2. Pp 130-147. 4. Geers, K. (2010). The challenge of cyber attack deterrence. Journal of computer law and security. Vol. 26. Pp 298-303. 5. Massumi, B.(2007). Potential Politics and the Primacy of Preemption. Theory & Event 10(2), The Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved October 29, 2013, from Project MUSE database.