Where’s a good standard when you need one?
This from the Telegraph:
Nato suffered around 2,500 suspected cyber attacks on its networks last year the alliance’s Secretary General said as defence ministers gathered for the first time to discuss the threat.
I’ve had more than 100 attempts in the last month that I know about. This doesn’t include any of the attempts turned away by my firewall. So either, pro rata, I am more attacked than NATO, or there are less than three people in NATO.
Around ten attacks a month were considered serious and a small number may have been carried out with the sponsorship or support of foreign powers, officials said.
Well, far more than ten attempts against me were serious because I was just one click away from cyber oblivion. And what does ‘a small number may have been…’ actually mean? I could just as easily say ‘a large number’ where my own attacks are concerned.
Anders Fogh Rasmussen said: “This is a serious challenge and we are taking it seriously because cyber attacks are getting more common and more complex and more dangerous. They come without warning from anywhere in the world and they can have devastating consequences.”
Could someone point me to a single example of a devastating cyber attack? Costly, yes. Disruptive, yes. Devastating, I don’t think so. And really, has nobody got round to warning NATO that it might be attacked?
A Nato official said none of the attacks had broken through Nato security.
No, good. My defences held firm as well.
The great majority were believed to be petty crime or activists. A small number may have had state backing, though officials declined to name countries involved.
Without details, this is pure unadulterated FUD.
What we need is an objective standard method for classifying the severity of an attack. Without that, we have no way of knowing whether NATO is being besieged by the Comment Crew or ‘Hello dearie, my name is Mrs Alice Clay…’
FUD, sadly, suits our political masters. So don’t hold your breath on getting more meaningful information from NATO (or government, or intelligence services). Just fear, uncertainty and doubt.