The United States government last week explicitly accused the Chinese military of launching innumerable cyber attacks in the past year on the American government's computer systems with the purpose of "building a picture of US network defence networks, logistics, and related military capabilities that could be exploited during a crisis".
With this direct accusation, the world has entered a new era of power play - an era in which cyber weapons are going to supplement, and perhaps over time replace, missiles, fighter jets, tanks and warships as the means of waging war. China, of course, promptly dismissed these allegations, saying that " we resolutely oppose all forms of hacker attacks".
To those of us who think of the cyber world as personal computers and smartphones that we use to send email, check the daily news, while away the time on social networks and do the occasional online bargain hunting, the term "cyber war" may appear mysterious - a creation of alarm mongers. How could an innocent email-like missive ever match the real power of a sword or a Sten gun - let alone a missile or a jet fighter - is a legitimate question.
The answer to this question lies in understanding the very purpose of wars. The Prussian General Baron Carl von Clausewitz, in his classic 1832 book, On War (still used as a textbook in military academies throughout the world), defined war as "merely the continuation of policy by other means". Such policies may be aimed at securing access to important raw material (coal, oil, etc) or export markets (the Opium Wars were waged by Britain to continue to sell opium in China). These goals are accomplished, according to Clausewitz, by "an act of force to compel our enemy to do our will" by reducing the enemy's ability to continue with the war. Thus, much effort was concentrated in the Vietnam War by the Americans to bomb and destroy the bridges that were used by the North Vietnamese to bring supplies to support their South Vietnamese comrades.
The goals of cyber war attacks are similar: bring down valuable infrastructure of an enemy so that he bends to our will. Except that, in our time, "valuable infrastructure" is not so much roads and bridges as the information highways that carry the signals that control banking, air traffic, electric power and so on.
Take, for example, the attack by the computer worm Stuxnet on 14 industrial sites in Iran. According to a New York Times report dated June 1, 2012, this worm destroyed 1,000 of the 5,000 centrifuges Iran had deployed to purify uranium; it was the handiwork of the United States government and was endorsed by US President Barack Obama.
A report in the professional journal IEEE Spectrum on February 26, 2013, explained how this worm accomplished its task: "First, it targeted Microsoft Windows machines and networks, repeatedly replicating itself. Then it sought out Siemens Step7 software, which is also Windows-based and used to program industrial control systems that operate equipment, such as centrifuges. Finally, it compromised the programmable logic controllers. The worm's authors could thus spy on the industrial systems and even cause the fast-spinning centrifuges to tear themselves apart, unbeknownst to the human operators at the plant."
One can only conjecture the scale of death and destruction that can be brought about if a hostile force targets similar electronic systems that control dams, nuclear power stations, the electricity grid or hospitals and medical units.
Countries such as India, which use imported telecom switches and routers, are particularly vulnerable. All that a hostile country needs to do is plant software code inside such equipment, which can then be activated when needed either to spy on traffic passing through such equipment or activate commands that can bring down the whole network system - be it air-traffic control or the electricity grid or a nuclear power plant.
What are the challenges that the authorities in India will face in addressing such dangers? A major challenge is that during the past 20 years any new technological development has been immediately perceived by the Indian elite as yet another opportunity to outsource revenues. So, you can already see various trade body officials holding conferences in Delhi and headlines such as "India to train 500,000 cyber warriors". This is the equivalent of greeting news of World War II as a tremendous job opportunity for Indian sepoys and a great source of foreign exchange earnings from their remittances. The real issues are receiving scarce attention. These include placing people with computer science skills in decision-making positions in national security; mandating that critical data infrastructure and cloud computing facilities are located within national borders; and creating domestic manufacturing capability for network routers.
In the tense years leading up to World War II, the French, remembering their experience in World War I when German tanks had run through them, built a series of concrete fortifications and tank obstacles along their border with Germany. In the event, when the war actually got under way, the Germans ran around these concrete fortifications - called "the Maginot Line" after the French general who spearheaded this initiative - and defeated France in six weeks. Hence the saying, "Generals always fight the last war."
Ajit Balakrishnan is the author of The Wave Rider ajitb@rediffmail.com
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper
