[147591] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] Iran and murder
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (=?UTF-8?Q?Lodewijk_andr=C3=A9_de_l)
Thu Oct 10 15:17:55 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwiYZfYAYU_r97B3WhWjbgSr8=W7-rC5HWHRCY3+p9qRfw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Lodewijk_andr=C3=A9_de_la_porte?= <l@odewijk.nl>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:18:54 +0200
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
Cc: John Kelsey <crypto.jmk@gmail.com>, "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>,
"cryptography@metzdowd.com" <cryptography@metzdowd.com>,
Tim Newsham <tim.newsham@gmail.com>
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
--===============0296503888522851587==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b471e6a436fa204e85ea88e
--047d7b471e6a436fa204e85ea88e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
2013/10/9 Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
> I see cyber-sabotage as being similar to use of chemical or biological
> weapons: It is going to be banned because the military consequences fall
> far short of being decisive, are unpredictable and the barriers to entry
> are low.
>
I doubt that's anywhere near how they'll be treated. Bio en Chem are banned
for their extreme relative effectiveness and far greater cruelty than most
weapons have. Bleeding out is apparently considered quite human, compared
to chocking on foamed up parts of your own lungs. Cyberwarfare will likely
be effectively counteracted by better security. The more I think the less I
understand "fall far short of being decisive". If cyber is out you switch
to old-school tactics. If chemical or biological happens it's either death
for hundreds or thousands or nothing happens.
Of course the bigger armies will want to keep it away from the
"terrorists", it'd level the playing field quite a bit. A 200 losses, 2000
kills battle could turn into 1200 losses, 1700 kills quite fast. But that's
not what I'd call a ban.
--047d7b471e6a436fa204e85ea88e
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra">2013/10/9 Phillip Hallam-Baker =
<span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:hallam@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank"=
>hallam@gmail.com</a>></span><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote =
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid=
;padding-left:1ex">
<div>I see cyber-sabotage as being similar to use of chemical or biological=
weapons: It is going to be banned because the military consequences fall f=
ar short of being decisive, are unpredictable and the barriers to entry are=
low.</div>
<div></div></blockquote></div><br>I doubt that's anywhere near how they=
'll be treated. Bio en Chem are banned for their extreme relative effec=
tiveness and far greater cruelty than most weapons have. Bleeding out is ap=
parently considered quite human, compared to chocking on foamed up parts of=
your own lungs. Cyberwarfare will likely be effectively counteracted by be=
tter security. The more I think the less I understand "fall far short =
of being decisive". If cyber is out you switch to old-school tactics. =
If chemical or biological happens it's either death for hundreds or tho=
usands or nothing happens.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Of course t=
he bigger armies will want to keep it away from the "terrorists",=
it'd level the playing field quite a bit. A 200 losses, 2000 kills bat=
tle could turn into 1200 losses, 1700 kills quite fast. But that's not =
what I'd call a ban.</div>
</div>
--047d7b471e6a436fa204e85ea88e--
--===============0296503888522851587==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
--===============0296503888522851587==--
