|
|
|
|
|
|
by grob-gambit
754 days ago
|
|
|
I think what is missing from this analysis is the offensive capability of American cyber. The way it is completely downplayed I suspect is proportional to its strength. If there was all this chatter how we need to invest more in offensive cyber I would be worried. The way we pretend like it doesn't even exist is all you need to know. |
|
|
While it doesn't mean we're fine, I would argue the depth and breadth of coverage has been strategically calculated and held to the point where there are still many contingencies foreign and domestic. I would also argue that the act of "cyber warfare" against us infrastructure would almost guarantee chaos for the attackers given the worlds reliance on us technology and assets, potentially self crippling their own capabilities.
In some ways there's a Mutually Assured Destruction perspective with cyber operations. There are levels of acceptability and most Nation States wouldn't dare cross the line. Where the real risk lies is with rogue small groups. Groups that don't require a lot of money and or time, just a few well placed exploits.
Having been in that world, at the higher echelons, I can attest that MONEY is being spent. Much more than many would know, to secure our foothold and capabilities.
I would thus agree, if we had excess chatter about needing more money for offensive cyber capabilities, I would be much more concerned.
Good thing about it is Cyber is less expensive than kinetic, and money can go much further.