I recently read two articles that made me consider is the goals of cyber security shifting - or perhaps more precisely, could it shift?
There's a heap relating to China that are worth reading on Threatpost - in particular anything relating to Dillon Beresford's dubious "research" into China's security.What is emerging here is rather scary pattern - it would seem (at least based on the media at hand) that China are pushing an offensive security agenda as not only part of a national defensive strategy, but also an economic policy for national benefit.
It's a no brainer that cyberwarfare offers truly asymetric capabilities. Success is not based on which force has the larger army or resources to throw at it but often those who have the most skills and display the greatest intent and capability in using them ("who dares wins" indeed). Economically, this is an awesome capability too. I read a report on innovation (by Cisco) awhile back (sadly no, I cannot find it dammit) but one of the things that was discussed was how it was a known problem that certain countries (for illustrative purposes, yes, China was one of them) do not innovate as well as others, so they have a tendency to reverse engineer other products or get designs from other countries by any means who have already done the innovation.
Now in an outsourcing model, a firm has already done the hard yakka on innovating - they just need to find a firm who can produce the good or service as cheaply as possible. However, if a firm is willing to steal those innovations from a competitor and beat them to the market, that has the potential to kill your competition. Money wasted on R&D that they were hoping to reclaim on future sales that will now never happen.
What the first article is referring to is China's willingness to promote itself as a superpower and gain advantage through every means, by basically stealing IP, economically crippling their competitors all without firing a single shot. Or taking your enemy out pre-emptively if you wanted.
The second article suggests that culturally they face significant challenges with defending their home systems. For example, the lack of peer review for their software leaves it potentially wide open to bugs. Equally, reporting them can create a loss of face (in more ways than one).
This just got me thinking - what if this means that China's actions on offense are due to the realisation they have defensive issues that aren't going away anytime soon? What if this means they were on the offense because it just made more sense - its a lot easier to kick in someone else's door than it is to guard your own? Especially if you know that in doing so you're depriving resources away (from an already taxed and resource starved adversary) that might normally be spent attacking you.
Again, I don't want this to degenerate into an Anti-China post - that's certainly not the point. It is meant to be a discussion signalling a shift in cyber security strategy. Is it possible for nation states, even corporations, to eventually move away from a defensive strategy and rely purely on offensive techniques since they will yield more fruit (albeit at greater risk)?
The US - and many other countries - are more than aware that their cybersecurity capabilities are thin at best. Would it not be in everyone's best interests, to then switch to an offensive approach when you consider that the results of such an approach would yield a higher degree of success?
I haven't put too much thought into this, but I am curious what others might think on this.