In defense of offense

Human nature can rarely change, and when it does, it is mostly a reaction to environmental variation. This is Darwinism, and was famously reflected in Lincoln’s observation about human nature: “…repeal all compromises -- repeal the declaration of independence -- repeal all past history, you still can not repeal human nature.”

Thus it is with security in the interconnected world. When we think of security at all, it is from a defensive standpoint. Our forebears built fences, walls, castles, forts, and each of those defensive measures waned in turn. In the great conflagrations of the 20th Century, only when strategy turned from defensive posturing to offensive maneuvering did the winning side prevail.

Could our current plight in the face of a constantly evolving threat state only be rectified with a transformation of human nature? Should we abandon all further hope of creating the decisive defensive weapon and simply go after the attackers?

It’s hard to imagine such a radical shift. The environmental variation has not sunk in – most of the industrial world seems only vaguely aware that a problem of security exists.

Thus, repealing human nature seems unlikely. The answer may be that threats must be preempted. And the only way to see that happen peacefully is through governmental cooperation, on a level that requires more than just police action.

Therein lies the rub. Governments are made up of humans, and Darwin, Lincoln, and your local DHS office are not going to repeal the defensive mood.

What am I driving at? Until everyone senses some kind of a worldwide criminal breakdown -- chaos, anarchy, disorder, and monetary collapse -- our defensive mentality is unlikely to change. The industry is safe for venture capitalists.

But if doomsday approaches, then survival may depend on a more proactive approach to the bad guys who thrive in the current setting. The pressure on governments, however reluctant, to cooperate in finding and eliminating cybercriminals behind their lines may push the cretins out of the picture.

But I’m not holding my breath.
close

Next Article in The News Team Blog

Sign up for our newsletters

POLL

More in The News Team Blog

Here are eight cyber crooks who got less prison time than Andrew Auernheimer

Here are eight cyber crooks who got less ...

The security researcher and self-proclaimed internet troll earned 41 months behind bars Monday for his role in using a script to retrieve data on roughly 120,000 Apple iPad users from ...

The White House thinks Julian Assange and Jeremy Hammond are no different ...

Whistleblowing organizations like WikiLeaks and accused hacktivists like Hammond are not foreign spies lusting to plunder intellectual property from U.S. corporations and government agencies in order to profit and gain a competitive advantage.

Obama would prefer to prosecute leakers than discuss Stuxnet

The FBI and DoJ are targeting high-level U.S. officials in hopes of learning who released classified information about Stuxnet to the press. What the government is not doing is publicly explaining why it launched Stuxnet.