The Morgan Doctrine: Cyber privateer code: 100-to-1 restitution

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Cyber privateer code: 100-to-1 restitution

Saturday, I posted a tongue-in-cheek note on the cyber security gang that couldn't shoot straight. The New York Times story was picked up and continued in today's Computerworld, HBGary Federal quits RSA over Anonymous WikiLaks eamail. In today's story, Computerworld shares reader comments on the HBGary Federal fiasco, and I can't help but be entertained. Gosh it must be embarrassing for a security company to be so badly spanked in public, and I should be ashamed of myself for jumping on the dogpile. Except I'm not. Because if the exposed emails are authentic, then "the gang that couldn't shoot straight" actually proposed illegal actions. So their "not shooting straight" is a double entendre. All along, I have made it clear that cyber privateers should be legally bonded, and must follow the cyber privateer code of honor.

That said, the acts of the Anonymous group who unveiled the HBGary Federal emails are also illegal and cannot be justified. Ditto for WikiLeaks. But I confess a certain amount of schizophrenic interest in the fruits of this thievery. Amusement at the stupidity of the approach recommended by HBGary Federal, and embarrassment at the culpability of US diplomats in hiding the truth about some of the world's bad guys. From whom are we trying to keep secrets? Certainly not the bad guys, who know that we know. No, as a matter of policy we're trying to spare the bad guys from public scrutiny. We're keeping secrets from the public, because public opinion might force a more coherent policy making process.

My own attitude is that we ought to shine the light on the world's cockroaches. Nevertheless, that end does not justify the means used by Anonymous or purveyors of WikiLeaks. Which is again why I call on an above-board legalization of cyber privateers, who will be held to a strict code of conduct and authorized by a bonding authority who won't take kindly to 100-to-1 restitution metrics. I'm intrigued that my first draft of the cyber privateer code seems to stand up, even after three months of kicking it around. Draft one! Not bad, friends. Not bad.

Go figure.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Implementation suggestions for THE MORGAN DOCTRINE are most welcome. What are the "Got'chas!"? What questions would some future Cyber Privateering Czar have to answer about this in a Senate confirmation hearing?

Background: Welcome black hats, white hats and cyber swashbucklers

The Revolutionary War was fought, financed, and pretty well WON by bonded privateers, legalized pirates who were given Letters of Marque and Reprisal by the Continental Congress and authorized to attack, capture and monetize British ships. The purpose of this site is to explore the possibility of a modern-day doctrine much like the Monroe Doctrine, by means of which the U.S. government could legally and, more importantly, effectively stop international hackers. Current cybercrime law is not only ineffective, but downright stupid. My Linux servers are attacked hundreds of times a day (mostly from China and former USSR domains), yet if I retaliate against those servers with some creative technology at my disposal (I know some VERY smart guys), then I am in violation of federal law and subject to some onerous penalties. We need more than a new law. We need a new international doctrine. I call it The Morgan Doctrine, named after Morgan Rapier, a fictional character I've created (hey, this is my way of establishing ownership of the concept, should it ever see the light of day).

Why a new international doctrine? Simply, nothing else will work. Introduced on December 2, 1823, the Monroe Doctrine told the world to keep their hands off the Americas. Combine this with current legal thinking on "hot pursuit" of fugitives. In 1917 the US Army went into Mexico after Pancho Villa. More recently, in 1960 Israeli Mossad agents abducted Adolf Eichmann from Argentina. Granted, much of the world regards the Eichmann adventure as a violation of international law. I don't share that opinion and therefore use it as the third leg of my Monroe-Pancho-Aldof platform for The Morgan Doctrine.

If someone comes into your home and attacks or attempts to rob you, you may shoot them dead. You may do so as long as they expire on your property. But what about cyber criminals? They attack you in your home from their homes. Retaliate in kind, and you go to jail. The Morgan Doctrine states simply that if you attack my computers (or my banking assets held in US-based computers), then under a certain set of well-defined conditions, a licensed and bonded "cyber privateer" may attack you in your home country and split the proceeds with the U.S. government. For the sake of argument, let's call it a 50-50 split (heh heh).

Right now, American law enforcement is completely unequipped to deal with the sheer number international cyber hackers. Sure, I could report each of the thousand daily attacks to the FBI, as could the millions of other attackees in the USA. But the volume of such reports would make any meaningful resolution laughable. Not to mention that the FBI has no jurisdiction outside the USA. Yet to make such "enforcement" profitable to recognized (ie, "bonded" "deputized") privateers, as Heath Ledger's Joker said in his last role, "Now you're talking!" You raid our bank accounts, we raid yours. You make money from off-shore child pornography, we're going to loot your bank accounts and, with some REALLY creative black hat operations, you will be taken off the grid worldwide to the extent that you'll not even complete a cell phone conversation for the remainder of your miserable depraved life. Okay, that last part probably won't fly, but you get my drift.

The purpose of this site is to explore the mechanics, legalities and practicality of The Morgan Doctrine.

And I will be the sole arbiter of whether or not your comments get posted. As Mel Brooks wrote, "It's good to be king."