Russian EW/Cyber doctrine

#1
Really interesting summary of the head of Russian army EW's contributions to Military Thought:

Russia’s Evolving Electronic Warfare Capability: Unlocking Asymmetric Potential

three points, really - first, they see it in terms of deep battle, as the operational depth. second, they want to be an independent arm of service, declared as a combat rather than combat-support function. third, they include anti-radiation weapons and they have plenty of those.
 
#3
If by "disabling" you mean "denying GPS" and thus precision timing, this is not a new concept.
 
#4

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
#6
I'd be more worried about what Vald's state sponsored hackers are up to. A number of companies important to the UK's infrastructure are not renowned for the security of their IT estates. Why target security hardened military IT infrastructure when you can mess up (say) an electricity or telecoms provider's computer system.

Wordsmith
 
#8
I'd be more worried about what Vald's state sponsored hackers are up to. A number of companies important to the UK's infrastructure are not renowned for the security of their IT estates. Why target security hardened military IT infrastructure when you can mess up (say) an electricity or telecoms provider's computer system.

Wordsmith
Hush. I am sure they have enough bloody ideas as it is!

 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
#10
Not just Russian hackers, the amount of Chinese telecoms kit being used in our infrastructure is rather worrying making a potential easy target
Buying key bits of infrastructure kits from potentially hostile nations with a long history of state sponsored hacking is stupidity of the highest order.

They'd never dream of putting any back doors in for example.

Wordsmith :mad:
 
#12
#13
Buying key bits of infrastructure kits from potentially hostile nations with a long history of state sponsored hacking is stupidity of the highest order.

They'd never dream of putting any back doors in for example.

Wordsmith :mad:
I've never been tempted by Chinese back doors.
 
#14
[QUOTE="Wordsmith, post: 8540740, member: 52171] . Why target security hardened military IT infrastructure when you can mess up (say) an electricity or telecoms provider's computer system.

Wordsmith[/QUOTE]


Or worse, a popular military banter site
 
#16
#18
Buying key bits of infrastructure kits from potentially hostile nations with a long history of state sponsored hacking is stupidity of the highest order.

They'd never dream of putting any back doors in for example.

Wordsmith :mad:
It's ok our government have got Huawei UK staff auditing Huawei kit rather than GCHQ, what could go wrong....

We can sleep well at night
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
#20
It's ok our government have got Huawei UK staff auditing Huawei kit rather than GCHQ, what could go wrong....

We can sleep well at night
GDPR kicks in May 28th - which means companies can be hit with much heavier fines for a significant data breach. At the moment I think big companies think paying the currently much smaller fines is cheaper than hiring IT staff to plug the holes. That attitude may changes when the first few companies get hit with £20 million fines.

Edited to add: this is an example of a current slap on the wrist.

Royal Mail fined £12,000 after sending more than 300,000 nuisance emails

Royal Mail won't give a flying f--k about a £12K fine - they probably raked in more from people who responded to the emails.

Wordsmith
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Top