U.S. Declined to Make Rules for Internet Warfare

Published in Xinhua Net
(China) on 2 July 2009
by Fei Li (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Liang Qin. Edited by Jessica Boesl.
The arms race with the United States caused the collapse of the USSR. What are Russia’s chances of winning in the current internet battlefield?

Following land, sea, air, and space, the internet has become the new battleground, where world powers continue to compete in an arms race. According to a recent report from the New York Times, U.S. President Obama will discuss the rules of internet warfare with Russian president Medvedev during his visit to Russia July 6 to July 8. However, given significant discrepancies on how to ensure internet security and develop international cooperation, this round of talks is extremely unlikely to reach an agreement.

The U.S. Alone Enjoys ‘Inherent Advantages’

Russian hackers are famous worldwide. Following its altercation with Georgia in August 2008, Russia can be said to have created a classic case of cyber war. Prior to military operations, Russia gained control of Georgia’s internet system, resulting in the paralysis of internet services required for Georgia’s transportation system, financial services and communications and media, and opening the door for an effortless military movement.

Despite the strength of Russia’s internet warfare capabilities, the core technology of the internet is still in the hands of the Americans, and Russia has yet to stand up to the real test. This is one reason why Russia is keen to develop international treaties related to internet warfare.

Since the birth of the internet, domain names and addresses have been controlled by the United States. In September 1998, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) was established. Though ICANN claimed to be a non-profit, private corporation, it was authorized by the U.S. Department of Commerce to be responsible for the international management of domain names and relevant internet technologies. In other words, the U.S. Department of Commerce has the right to overrule ICANN at any time.

The United States also holds the main arteries of the internet. Not only do the service mains of all countries have to go through the main routes in the U.S., but 10 of the 13 global internet name root servers are also in American hands. If already in control of the domain name of a certain country, the United States could make this country instantly ‘disappear’ from the internet.

America’s Strategic Trap?

America’s control of the internet stretches far beyond most people’s imaginations. Once the internet war breaks out, the U.S. government will make use of its terrifying powers over internet technology. Therefore, the United States is tempting other countries to begin the internet arms race. Once begun, America will exert its own online prowess on other, weaker countries, dragging them down.

On June 23, 2009, U.S. Defense Secretary Gates approved the creation of a unified U.S. Cyber Command, which, led by a four-star general, is among the ranks of the U.S. Air Force Space Command. Based on the evaluation of defense expert Joel Harding, who has already tracked the U.S. military's hacking project for 13 years, the American army has 3,000 to 5,000 information warfare specialists at the moment and 50,000 to 70,000 soldiers involved in cyber war. Adding the number of original electronic warfare staff, the U.S. online army currently numbers approximately 88,700.

U.S. defense contractors estimate that the U.S. Army's expenditures on internet-based warfare are over US$10 billion annually. In order to improve its ability to attack online, the U.S. Army is energetically developing weapons of cyber-war. They have accumulated over 2,000 computer viruses, and, if deemed necessary, could deploy them along with well-trained internet troops to launch cyber attacks at any time, invading other countries’ internet systems to damage, paralyze and even control them.

Hard to Establish the Rules

Should America prove to have better cyber warfare capabilities, Russia advocates cutting down on online offensive weapons, and insists that all countries sign a treaty to ban efforts to secretly implant malicious codes in the computer or internet systems of other countries in the future. Russia also suggests that all countries enhance their internet surveillance systems and avoid making cyber attacks on non-military objects or by devious methods.

The United States is opposed the development of an international treaty similar to the Chemical Weapons Convention for network warfare. The U.S. insists that all the countries cooperate and use international enforcement agencies to fight cyber crime. America’s excuse is that international treaties may work for governments, but hackers are still beyond their reach.

The United States announced in 2006 that it would join the Convention on Cybercrime, launched by the European Commission. In collaboration with multinational police, prosecution agencies and international law enforcement agencies, it has cracked down on internet attackers.

However, suspicious of violations of its sovereignty, Russia has declined to accede to the Convention on Cybercrime because it grants the police of other countries permission to conduct cross-boundary investigations into network crimes without informing state parties.

In other words, in an effort to protect its own economic strength, Russia would rather utilize international treaties to prevent America's development of internet warfare rather than to take part in an online 'arms race.' Meanwhile, the United States wants to lure other countries into participating in an online 'arms race.' Acting as the ‘international police’ of cyber world, the U.S. could utilize certain clauses and excuses to infringe on the sovereignty of other countries or intervene in their domestic affairs.

The author of this article is a Professor at Chengdu University of Information Technology.


美国拒绝给网络战订规则


新华网 ( 2009-07-02 09:43:18 ) 来源: 国际先驱导报

与美国进行的军备竞赛曾拖垮了前苏联,在当前与美国之间的网络战场上,俄罗斯的胜算又有几何

《国际先驱导报》特约撰稿李飞 继海陆空以及外太空之后,网络已经成为世界大国争夺和展开军备竞赛的新战场。据《纽约时报》日前的报道,美国总统奥巴马定于在7月6日至8日访问俄罗斯时,将与俄罗斯总统梅德韦杰夫讨论有关网络战规则的议题。但从当前两国在如何保障网络安全和展开国际合作问题上存在巨大分歧来看,此次会谈取得共识的可能性微乎其微。

美国独享“先天优势”

俄罗斯的黑客举世闻名,在2008年8月的俄格冲突中,俄罗斯可以说创造了一个网络战的经典案例。在军事行动前,俄控制了格鲁吉亚的网络系统,使格鲁吉亚的交通、通讯、媒体和金融互联网服务瘫痪,从而为自己顺利展开军事行动打开了通道。
尽管俄罗斯的网络战实力不俗,但由于网络核心技术掌握在美国人手中,俄罗斯的网络战并没有经受真正的考验。这也是为何俄罗斯积极主张制定网络战国际条约的一个原因。
自互联网诞生以来,网络域名与地址的监管便由美国掌控。1998年9月,互联网域名与地址管理机构(ICANN)成立,虽然ICANN自称是非赢利性的私营公司,却是由美国商务部授权ICANN负责域名和互联网相关技术的国际管理,“这也就意味着美国商务部有权随时否决ICANN的管理权。”
与此同时,美国还掌握着互联网的主动脉。不仅各个国家和地区的通信支干线都要经过美国主干线,美国还掌握着全球互联网13台域名根服务器中的10台,只要在根服务器上屏蔽国家域名,就可以让一个国家在网络上瞬间“消失”。

美国的战略陷阱?

美国对互联网的控制程度已经远远超出了普通人的想象,一旦网络战暴发,美国政府将随时可以调用强大到可怕的IT巨头力量。因此美国正在诱使他国进行网络军备竞赛,一旦加入网络军备竞赛,美国就可以“以己之长攻彼之短”,将对方拖垮。
美国国防部长盖茨6月23日正式下令组建网络司令部,网络战司令部将成为与空军作战司令部、太空司令部平级的单位,由一名四星上将领导。根据对美军黑客项目跟踪了13年的防务专家乔尔·哈丁的评估,目前美军共有3000-5000名信息战专家,5-7万名士兵涉足网络战。如果加上原有的电子战人员,美军的网战部队人数应该在88700人左右。
据美国国防承包商预估,美军每年投入网络战的费用超100亿美元。为了网络进攻能力,美军大力开发计算机网络战武器,美军已经研制出2000多种计算机病毒武器,加上训练有素的网络战进攻部队,只要美国需要,随时可发起信息网络攻击,侵入别国网络,进行破坏、瘫痪甚至控制。

规则难寻也难定

在美国网络战实力占优的现实下,俄罗斯方面主张削减网络攻击性武器,强调各国应通过签订某种条约,禁止向他国电脑或网络系统中秘密植入恶意代码,以用于未来战争,同时还建议,各国应承诺不袭击网络上的非军事目标,不通过伪装手段发动网络袭击,同时加强对互联网的监控。
美国反对为网络战制定类似《限制化学武器公约》这样的多边国际条约,主张各国在国际执法机构协调下展开合作,共同打击网络犯罪。美国的理由是,国际条约只对政府存在约束力,而对黑客鞭长莫及。
美国在2006年宣布加入欧洲委员会发起的《打击网络犯罪公约》,与多国警方和检察机构在网络安全领域展开合作,借助国际执法部门对网络袭击者实施直接打击。对此,俄罗斯拒绝加入这一公约,认为它允许他国警方在未告知当事国情况下对一些网络犯罪案件展开跨境调查,涉嫌“侵犯主权”。
也就是说,俄罗斯由于经济实力问题,不想参加“网络军备竞赛”,想通过国际条约限制美国发展网络战,而美国想诱使他国参与“网络军备竞赛”,同时充当网络世界的“国际警察”,这样可以利用某种接口侵犯他国主权,干涉他国内政。(作者系成都信息工程学院教授)


This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Canada: No, the Fed Was Not ‘Independent’ before Trump

Mexico: Urgent and Important

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Topics

Canada: No, the Fed Was Not ‘Independent’ before Trump

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Mexico: Urgent and Important

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Austria: The EU Must Recognize That a Tariff Deal with Trump Is Hardly Worth Anything

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Related Articles

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

India: Will New US Envoy Help to Repair Ties under Threat?

France: Global South: Trump Is Playing into China’s Hands

Zimbabwe: What the West Doesn’t Understand about China’s Growing Military Might