Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Why M.A.D. Will Not Work as a Cyberwar Deterrent

The reason M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction) worked in the nuclear arms race was that it took government-level resources to play in the game. M.A.D. will not work in the cyberwar arena because anybody can enter the battlefield. Anybody! All they need is a brilliant mind and computer equipment that costs less than a Yugo.

My friend, the late science fiction author Frank Hebert, saw this clearly (see my post here). Simply, when any whacko can muster the technology destroy civilization as we know it (see my post on "Plan B" scenarios), paraphrasing one of my favorite lines from the movie Armageddon, "All the worst parts of the Bible could easily come to pass."

So to my conspiracy theorist genius friend JOSEPH from Spain, who embarrassed the FBI's best and brightest (see my post here), you may have the right outcome for all the wrong reasons.

In fact, I don't even have to sell ANYONE, in ANY GOVERNMENT, ANYWHERE on creating a bonding authority to back licensed cyber privateers. Because they will emerge naturally, as "data exhaust" from today's Computerworld story shows (see story here). The headline reads, "Security-as-a-service gaining popularity."

Such above-mentioned security services will be in geometrically increasing demand as "F--- The World" anarchists decide to focus their brain power on a real way to…FTW.


1 comment:

  1. Hello Mr Bennet:

    + This reminds me of the sad story of the Maginot Line:

    + The Maginot Line dominated French military thinking in the inter-war years. The Maginot Line was a vast fortification that spread along the French/German border but became a military liability when the Germans attacked France in the spring of 1940 using blitzkrieg – a tactic that completely emasculated the Maginot Line’s purpose.

    + It is the story of one of the most stunning defensive failures.

    + The Victory can be achieved by different means.The enemy always takes advantage of the weaknesses and the feeling of security is a weakness.

    Someone from the government should see this documentary by National Geographic:

    Is necessary to be prepared for anything (and this is not a Buddhist thinking).

    Bye from Spain.


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?