Comment Re:The questions are interesting... (Score 1) 543
I'd have to say that I disagree at least somewhat. He did make a genuine attempt to answer at least some of the questions. However, it's clear that this was primarily a recruitment effort.
To be fair, it's also true that some of the questions weren't germane to their mission. In answering the question from Isaac-Lew, he states that "Our first priority is to work with DoD to defend AF military resources". That means that they are (at least publicly) a defensive operation rather than offensive. The closest they'd come to offensive operations would be to trace back to the actual source of the attack while doing forensics work.
Perhaps a better way to ask some of those questions would be to ask for pointers to publicly available material on current military doctrine on cyber-war. Of course, that's assuming there are any. In that absense, I think a good guideline would be the willingness of the military to accept civilian casualties and damage to homes and infrastructure in Iraq while conducting actions against hostile people. Likewise, look at current administration actions including laws that they are demanding be passed.
The China question was a very good one. In fact, it's extremely relevant in another sense. With all the outsourcing we're doing, a great deal of COTS (commercial off the shelf) software is being maintained and developed by people in those countries. That includes software for a security focused company I used to work for.
It's primary focus was on collecting information about vulnerabilities found on the monitored computer systems. Oddly enough, the management found that outsourcing it to a firm in Shanghai was perfectly acceptable. I'd like to suggest that the military reconsider its "use COTS wherever possible" policy.
One final note. I found it interesting that, while answering the question about physical fitness, part of his reply was "we must ... be able to establish and protect our cyber/communications structures and networks in remote, even austere conditions".
Combat Control is the AF equivalent of the Navy Seals. Their primary mission is to establish a safe air field for landing AF air craft. This means that they go into overtly hostile conditions to do reconnaissance, subdue and/or disrupt enemy forces in the selected area and protect those who do the initial prep-work for the air field. Adding the ability to disrupt command and control functions in the area would definitely be a huge help. For you 24 and Tom Clancy fans, that sounds an awful lot like some of the people he's looking for would actually be part of combat control units on at least a part time basis.
To be fair, it's also true that some of the questions weren't germane to their mission. In answering the question from Isaac-Lew, he states that "Our first priority is to work with DoD to defend AF military resources". That means that they are (at least publicly) a defensive operation rather than offensive. The closest they'd come to offensive operations would be to trace back to the actual source of the attack while doing forensics work.
Perhaps a better way to ask some of those questions would be to ask for pointers to publicly available material on current military doctrine on cyber-war. Of course, that's assuming there are any. In that absense, I think a good guideline would be the willingness of the military to accept civilian casualties and damage to homes and infrastructure in Iraq while conducting actions against hostile people. Likewise, look at current administration actions including laws that they are demanding be passed.
The China question was a very good one. In fact, it's extremely relevant in another sense. With all the outsourcing we're doing, a great deal of COTS (commercial off the shelf) software is being maintained and developed by people in those countries. That includes software for a security focused company I used to work for.
It's primary focus was on collecting information about vulnerabilities found on the monitored computer systems. Oddly enough, the management found that outsourcing it to a firm in Shanghai was perfectly acceptable. I'd like to suggest that the military reconsider its "use COTS wherever possible" policy.
One final note. I found it interesting that, while answering the question about physical fitness, part of his reply was "we must
Combat Control is the AF equivalent of the Navy Seals. Their primary mission is to establish a safe air field for landing AF air craft. This means that they go into overtly hostile conditions to do reconnaissance, subdue and/or disrupt enemy forces in the selected area and protect those who do the initial prep-work for the air field. Adding the ability to disrupt command and control functions in the area would definitely be a huge help. For you 24 and Tom Clancy fans, that sounds an awful lot like some of the people he's looking for would actually be part of combat control units on at least a part time basis.
