*You may have missed the bulletin here while you were trying to get that PC of yours to stop its strange misbehavior. via SANS
–Cyber Warfare Part of Israeli Defense Arsenal
(February 9, 2010)
Speaking at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), Israeli
chief of military intelligence Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin noted that "using
computer networks for espionage is as important to warfare today as the
advent of air support was to warfare in the 20th century," giving power
to small countries that was once reserved for just large countries. (((Gee. How handy for them.)))
Yadlin said the Israeli military is developing an "internet warfare"
team. There is evidence that Israeli forces used cyber warfare
techniques to help jets launch a strike on a suspected Syrian nuclear
facility under construction. (((Hey "small countries." Why not cut to the chase and incinerate the planet with your new button-pushing capacity? Hint: use Pakistani nukes as their security sucks and everybody hates them anyway.)))
Israeli cyber warfare appears to be
focused on thwarting Iran's development of uranium enrichment plants and
other nuclear-related efforts. Newspaper reports indicate that Israeli
intelligence attempted to plant software in equipment that could damage
Iranian nuclear program information systems. In these cases, the
targets are systems that are not Internet connected, so the malware is
hidden on mobile devices such as cell phones and computers that could
be connected to the isolated information systems.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/dti/2010/02/01/DT_02_01_2010_p39-198440.xml&headline=Israel%20Adds%20Cyber-Attack%20to%20IDF
(((Cynical moans from the experts:)))
[Editor's Note (Pescatore): Cyber warfare has been part of every major
country's military arsenal for over a decade now.
(Skoudis): This is the new normal. Countries are using integrated cyber
operations for intelligence and offensive military operations. It's
cost effective, supports achieving military objectives, and has
relatively lower risk than other methods.
(Schultz): It is a cheaper, less risky form of spying. Consider the
risks and costs of training spies and getting them placed in positions
in which they are able to steal information versus social engineering,
breaking into systems, and/or installing malware in systems while the
perpetrator works from home. The risks-rewards ratio of the later is
much more favorable.]
*In similar stone-obvious news: what do you think is more dangerous to Europe's endangered prosperity: money-laundering, or American banks? If your obviously reasonable answer is "American banks," this shattering tactical defeat in the War on Terror won't much surprise you:
TOP OF THE NEWS
–EU Parliament Votes Down Interim US-EU Banking Data Agreement
(February 11, 2010)
The European Parliament has voted down an interim agreement that would
have allowed the US access to EU residents' banking transaction
information held in the SWIFT system. The US has been analyzing
European banking transactions since late 2001 as part of its efforts to
fight terrorism, but that fact was not made public until 2006. European
Ministers had passed the interim agreement to allow continued US
monitoring of SWIFT late last year; the European Parliament's rejection
of that agreement appears to be focused on privacy issues.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/11/europe_rejects_data_share/
http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/European-Parliament-blocks-US-access-to-SWIFT-data-928492.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8510471.stm
