Source: Corbett Report and Global Research.ca
TRANSCRIPT & SOURCES:
In recent weeks the governments of Britain, Israel, the US, Japan, India and China have reported alleged cyber attacks by foreign militaries, hackers, and malicious software like Duqu, a virus similar to the Stuxnet cyber weapon constructed by Israel and the US
for use against Iran’s nuclear program. Although the nature and origin
of the attacks or even whether they took place at all cannot be
independently confirmed, the supposed threats are being used to propose
punishing new legislation aimed at stifling internet freedoms and are
igniting new rivalries in what many see as the battlefield of the 21st
century: cyberspace.
In the US, a report
to congress by the National Counterintelligence Executive is touting
cyber-espionage as a major threat to the American economy. In a section
entitled “Pervasive Threat from Adversaries and Partners” the report
reads:
“Chinese actors are the world’s most active and persistent
perpetrators of economic espionage” and “Russia’s intelligence services
are conducting a range of activities to collect economic information and
technology from US targets.”
In the wake of the report, DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency tasked with maintaining the US military’s technological
advantage, has asked for a 73% funding increase in fiscal 2012, from $120 million to $208 million. Meanwhile, China has lashed out at the report, calling such allegations “irresponsible.”
Now, governments around the world are using fears over cyber attacks
as an excuse to crack down on the internet freedoms of their own
populations.
Last month, China vowed a crackdown
on social media websites and microblogs as a response to increased
boldness in Chinese bloggers in criticizing the government. Beijing’s
poor response to the high-speed rail crash in Wenzhou earlier this year
led to such an outpouring of abuse on the internet that the story was
picked up by China’s mainstream broadcasters. A statement from the State
Internet Information Office is vowing that such criticism will not be
tolerated however, with Xinhua reporting that three of the offending
bloggers have been punished by local authorities.
Just days after that announcement, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced
that it’s considering using social media to track and surveil its own
population. DHS Undersecretary Caryn Wagner said that the government
fears social unrest like that seen in Tunisia last December and wants to
use social media services like Twitter to monitor its own population.
Last January, Senators Lieberman and Collins renewed calls to give the president a kill switch over the internet to protect the government in times of emergency, a call echoed by Senator McCain last July.
Last week, British Prime Minister David Cameron spoke
of the need to strike a balance between cybersecurity and freedom of
speech. Speaking at a London cyberspace conference, he renewed British
calls for an international framework for cybersecurity. Internet
security expert Eugene Kaspersky, speaking at the same conference,
defended his own idea for internet passports
as a requirement for logging on to the internet and an internet police
force for cracking down on unwanted behaviour, adding that countries
that did not agree to such a framework should simply be cut off from the
internet.
Kaspersky is not the only one arguing for a so-called passport or
license to access the internet. In the past, the idea has been proposed
by Craig Mundie, Microsoft’s chief technology officer, and the White
House drafted a proposal earlier this year encouraging the
private-sector development of an Internet ID.
Critics say that such a plan would be the end of the internet as we
know it, making legitimate political protest and government crticism
impossible. In a scathing critique of Kaspeserky’s proposal, security technologist Bruce Schneier lashed out at attempts to end anonymity on the internet:
“Universal identification is impossible. Even attribution – knowing
who is responsible for particular internet packets – is impossible.
Attempting to build such a system is futile, and will only give
criminals and hackers new ways to hide,” he wrote. “Attempts to banish
anonymity from the internet won’t affect those savvy enough to bypass
it, would cost billions, and would have only a negligible effect on
security.”
