State-linked hackers are increasingly targeting critical sectors with no signs of stopping.
NATO countries’ restrained response to hybrid attacks is at odds with public opinion, new polling shows: Broad swaths of the public in key allied countries say actions such as cyberattacks on hospitals should be considered acts of war.
The POLITICO Poll, conducted in the United States, Canada, France, Germany and the United Kingdom, showed a majority of people agreed that a cyberattack that shuts down hospitals or power grids constitutes an act of war. Canadians felt the strongest about the issue, with 73 percent agreeing.
Respondents from all five countries also rallied behind the idea that sabotaging undersea cables or energy pipelines — which has occurred more frequently in recent years — should be considered be an act of war.
What does NATO think about Israel specifically, repeatedly hitting hospitals with bombs?
Probably the same thing they thought when they were training and arming fascist terrorist groups throughout Europe…
“…We’re the good guys. He he he he.”
What are you referring to? I’m not familiar with nato training and arming fascists in europe. The US does it in latin america plenty, or has and soon will again. But we don’t normally call non europeans fascist I suppose even when it fits.
Operation Gladio.
Oh jesus I forgot about that, didn’t recall how extensive it was I had heard something about this in Italy but not all the details.
It’s never been more clear we do need all new leadership, not the least in our bureaucracies, we are supporting them all because the president of the US has been on his deep state thing, trying to make them even worse in his service, so we support everything about them, it’s incredibly frustrating this dynamic plays out everywhere. All federal agencies are failing in their statutory duties, captured by malign interests, and the democrats will never free them, they were chosen not to free them.
The CIA and their intelligence partners have been perhaps amongst the worst, with everything they’ve done, and we’ve a weapon to take them all down and remake the agency if we could retake the country, in the Epstein scandal. The CIA aided and abbetted a foreign intelligence agency to compromise our politicians and other swells, and to blackmail them with it. Executable offenses to hear the president talk about treason, and that’s what this is, of the highest order, or its facsimile in US law.
Nato thinks they are run by spineless cunts that believe in nothing other than self interest that’s what.
Some something Hamas uses them as Human Shields
Why set up everything to not work without the internet and databases though?
We know it can work without them, because it did work without them, for lifetimes before ours, this all happened within out lifetimes. It’s foolish to set everything up to not be able to function with no electricity, let alone for no internet or a corruption of files.
It’s no different than doing it with any other weapon. If a spy went and cut a hospital’s power supply, the government would be apoplectic. If they do it with a computer instead of an axe, car, or bomb, the reaction should be the same.
Absolutely not. Cyber attacks are not comparable with real attacks, when it comes to counterattacking.
I mean, how would that even work?
Let’s do an example: A hospital has a cyber attack.
Assumption 1: We notice the attack.
This may sound stupid, but maybe we don’t even notice, that data is stolen and no one ever notices.But they want to destroy shit, so they do!
Okay, let’s say we notice the attack.
Assumption 2: We notice the attack in time.
What does that mean, they destroyed stuff, right?Yes, but when? Some attacks delete backups for weeks and then destroy the data. We are talking about a government and not a money hungry hacker group here, they have time.
Maybe all traces of the attack are deleted, before all goes black?
But we’re the good ones, the smart ones, we notice it in time. Cool.
Assumption 3: it’s possible to trace the origin.
Again, how do we do that? Does the code look russian? Maybe Isreal just knows how to trick us. We maybe have no IP, since it came in via USB or CD?
Okay, we’ll ignore that. We have an IP.
Assumption 4: The IP tells us, who it was.
An IP from Israel attacks an american hospital. Clear case, let’s attack back. Right? Wrong.
The IP is private, so it could be some random dude and you just attacked a country for one person doing a crime? Great job.
Even worse, maybe the person has a hacked smart fridge and the attack came from Russia. How would you know?Okay, let’s say the IP is from a datacenter. Bad example, they rent their servers…
Okay, the IP is from a government agency. Now we’re talking. They don’t rent; it’s unrealistic, they were hacked. We can attack back!
Assumption 5: We know, what to do next.
(This is not a strong argument, but it stills stands)
But what do we attack? One of their hospitals? Do we start a war with them? Call the embassy?
All of this on all the prior assumptions…
If a data breach in one company can expose “sensitive data on more than 190 million people”, the main vulnerabilities is that antitrust isn’t working is intended and that the means testing for things like medicine requires massive centralization. Who puts into law the awful policy of one big stash of sensitive data on everybody in the country, should be held responsible when the stash inevitably gets cracked. No “offensive military” cyber responses have been invented that would fix own bad policy yet.
