SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico – The term “cyberwar” is the “zero day” of security jargon; it’s getting so that every bug is a zero day and every attack is hash-tagged cyberwar. Read More ..
This serves only to distract smart people from making smart decisions.
Too much brainpower and bandwidth is being wasted on labels, while networks run at the whim of hackers, regardless of whether they live in Atlanta or Asia—and it’s forcing the cyberwar discourse down some nerve-racking paths.
Some argue that without blood and physical destruction, you don’t have war. Malware used to steal data or to cause manufacturing equipment to malfunction are not kinetic weapons, therefore you don’t have war. Without accurate attribution of who is behind an attack, you don’t have an adversary. Without an adversary, you don’t have war. You may have victims, but these are victims of cybercrime or cyberespionage, and not victims of acts of war.
“Cyberwar is not the appropriate term for what we’re seeing,” said Lee Vorthman, CISO at NetApp US Public Sector, and a speaker on a panel discussion during the Kaspersky Security Analyst Summit.