If politicians don't create a ruckus now about the very real fact that our critical computer infrastructure is literally wide open to attack, it is my opinion that nothing will ever get done about it. What makes them run around like chickens with their heads cut off is that we as a nation really are standing here with our pants down: the tools and policies for combatting cyber threats simply are not in place.

I know that the author would not disagree with me that these things must be put in place in the near future. If they are not, we do face real risks. The author states that if our utilities were assaulted "life might be a bit inconvenient or slower than normal at times, but we will still be alive". This would not necessarily be the case if a faceless hacker manages to dump a million gallons of chlorine into an out-valve that provides drinking water to 100,000 homes. This would not be the case if a hacker was able to remotely disable security systems around a dam so that operatives on the ground could strategically place explosives that would flood an entire city. This would not be the case if hackers were able to shut down electricity to hospitals all over the country.

These ideas might seem farfetched at first, but I guess that these are the types of things that are running through the minds of our politicians. They want people to share their fear so that something will get done to secure our nation's information infrastructure.

All in all, though, I agree that applying the word "terrorism" to a phreaker or a cracker or even to most hackers is simply ludicrous and it is only, as I have mentioned, to stir up fear not of real threats but of the possibility of threats.

--kc

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/111/16589#16589