Since when has the Rule of Law
bothered Nation State Intelligence Agencies ?
The European Parliament has been asked to adopt a new set of “norms” about online conflict. The norms were developed by the Global Commission on the Stability for Cyberspace (GCSC), a group backed and funded by the governments of The Netherlands, France and Singapore, together with Microsoft and The Internet Society, that …
Wow. They really don't understand war, do they? It's basically an "unpleasant effect on civilians" by definition.
More so in the last century or so than earlier when mostly* all they had to worry is a new overlord with an axe to grind or being called up by the local lord for cannonfodder/press-ganged/drafted when the armies would meet on 'the field of battle'.
Kind of like how it used to be considered good form to take pub fights outside first.
* Except when invaders laid siege to towns and punitively massacred everyone for making them sit outside for months.
when mostly* all they had to worry is a new overlord with an axe to grind or being called up by the local lord for cannonfodder/press-ganged/drafted
Read some more about the 100 Years War - the English had this wonderful thing they called Chevauchée - basically letting their armies loose on the French countryside to burn, kill and pillage a wide area around the direction of march. Designed to do two things: strike fear into the opposing peasantry and prove to them how their nominal feudal overlords were powerless to protect them.
For more detail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevauch%C3%A9e
(As the article says - it wasn't a new tactic but it was used heavily by the English in France. The Romans had a similar system - as said by Tacitus: "ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant" - they make a desert and call it peace. What we nowadays would call a "scorched earth policy". )
it wasn't a new tactic and it lasted for a long time after that too - all the way till the Napoleonic wars.
That is how Napoleon, Blucher and Suvorov won their battles - their armies pretty much ate everything within 30-40 miles from the road they travelled on. As a result they travelled light with minimal or no supply trains and were mobile allowing them near-blitzkrieg marches around Europe. It is also what defeated Napoleon's Russian campaign. The Russians knew the tactics all too well and worked their counter-tactics accordingly. Denis Davydov(*) organized the termination of any "foraging parties" and the main Russian army kept the Napoleon's army within the area they devastated on their way in. As a result they did not need to win any major battles - they simply had to be successful in preventing Napoleon from escaping the "scorched earth" area +/20 miles on either side of the old Smolensk road. Winter, hunger and disease did the rest.
Haven't read much history, have you? Armies "foraging" off the countryside. The menfolk getting conscripted on the spot. The women being forced to serve other ways. Then there's Genghis Khan in the central Eurasian plains, Magdeburg and the rest of the Reformation and Counter Reformation wars, Romans salting the ruins of Carthage... I'm seeing a pattern and it isn't the one you're espousing.
Did I miss the phrase "think of the children", or is that part of the negotiations?
Well, if they did think of the children, then nations would not act childish as spoiled rats. On the other hand, children are known to survive without the internet. It is hard on them and they may have long lasting dopamine-deficiency traumas, but they should manage in the end.
> The GCSC’s norms suggest that core internet protocols like DNS, border gateway protocol and IPv6, and the infrastructure that keeps them running, should be off-limits during cyber-conflict because of the likely unpleasant effects on civilians.
> Support for that idea has strengthened a little thanks to recently-proposed amendments to the EU Cybersecurity Act that call for “the development and promotion of policies that would sustain the general availability or integrity of the public core of the open internet, which provide the essential functionality to the Internet as a whole and which underpin its normal operation” and go onto mention DNS, BGP, and IPv6.
What? It's open season on IPv4?
I guess that's one way to speed up the adoption of IPv6 that was noted in another of today's articles,
...a little harder for nations to ignore them and perhaps one day lead to more civilised cyber-wars.
The concept of "civilized" warfare (cyber or the shooting types) escapes me. I don't any war ever being "civilized". It's brutal by nature and civilians are merely called "collateral damage".
When one air burst can know out the electrical grid over most of the continent? (Here in the US, I hope that the EU has their act together on this one.)
Seriously, these people need to get over themselves. None of the protocols are hardened, and patriotic hacking is a real thing. (Some Al Quada sites were taken down around 2002, much to the CIA's chagrin, for instance.)
1) If you don't harden your electrical grid, you don't have internet survivability.
2) If you don't harden your internet protocols, you don't have internet survivability.
3) The "international community" "condemns" slavery, but check out Africa. Also, child soldiers. Also, the use of poisonous gas. Also, political imprisonment. (Check out China.)
These people need to go get real jobs.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019