One Article Review
| Source |  AlienVault Blog |
|---|---|
| Identifiant | 2850475 |
| Date de publication | 2021-05-28 10:00:00 (vue: 2021-05-28 11:05:37) |
| Titre | Asymmetrical threats in Cybersecurity |
| Texte | Security and defense theory are inextricably entwined. Consider medieval castles. They were designed as a defensive mechanism that provided security to those within, most of whom were simply civilians hiding behind the walls for protection from invaders. Within cybersecurity, multiple concepts from defense and war theory can be applied to better address the cyber risks facing organizations. In fact, the term Bastion Host refers to a Bastion which has very militaristic connotations. In previous posts, the concepts of security cycle theory, attacker motivations, and threat adaptation have been explored. Another critical concept is that of asymmetric threats. The terms Asymmetrical Warfare or Asymmetrical Threats can be summarized simply as the asymmetry that exists between two adversaries and the tactics used by the weaker adversary to render the strengths of the stronger adversary moot. It is rare, though mathematically possible, to have parity between adversaries. Consider team sports, as an example. While not security nor defense related, there are indeed two adversaries playing a game against each other. Each side will have advantages and disadvantages. Within security and defense, it is a bit more profound. Consider the US Military for a moment. Since the end of World War II, which is often thought of as the start of US hegemony, the United States has arguably fielded the most powerful conventional military in the history of the world. Despite this fact, the US has struggled in conflicts in Vietnam, Somalia, and most recently in Iraq, and Afghanistan. In each of these theaters it was groups of lesser trained, less well-equipped insurgents that created significant challenges to the US military. The US is not alone in this dubious distinction of struggling against militarily weaker opponents. The powerful Prussian military was defeated by a much weaker opponent, France, under the command of Napoleon, and in 1989, the Soviet Union was defeated by the Afghanistan resistance movement after 10 years of bloody guerilla war. If Prussia and the USSR were militarily superior to their foes, how did they end up losing their respective wars? The losses were largely due to the application of what we now term asymmetrical warfare. In a basic sense Asymmetrical Warfare applies to the strategies and tactics employed by a militarily weaker opponent to gain advantage of vulnerabilities in the stronger opponent therefore rendering the advantages moot. As an example, few military forces on the planet would face the US military in open combat in a Mahanian naval battle or with the US in a linear, kinetic tank battle. As can be seen by the US routing of the Iraqis tank forces during the Battle of Medina Ridge in Desert Storm, doing so would lead to near certain defeat. If an inferior military opponent cannot fa |
| Envoyé | Oui |
| Condensat | “at “blocking “if “on “there “to “what the 1961 1989 a’s about above accepted according action actions actor actors adaptation adapting adaptive adding addition address adept advanced advantage advantages adversaries adversary adversary’s afghanistan afraid after again against agency air akin all allow almost alone along also always amateur ambush analytics another any appears applicability application applied applies apply applying appropriate appropriately are arena arguably around asymmetric asymmetrical asymmetry attack attacker attackers attacks attest auditing automatic back barrel basic bastion battle battlefield become becomes: been begins behind being beneath best better between bit bloody both boxes browning buried business businesses but butt caesar called can cannot castle castles certain challenges characterize checked civilians classes classic clear clearly cloth coin combat command companies company components compromise concept concepts conclusion conditioned conducted confer conflicts connotations consequences consider consistent consists constant constantly continuously controls conventional could countdown counter countered created creative criteria critical current cyber cybersecurity cyberwarfare cycle data day’s ddos deep deeper defeat defeated defeating defend defending defense defensive denial desert designed despite detection determined development did direct disadvantages discussion disposal distinction distributed doing dominating draped dtra dubious due during each earth easy effectively efficiently electronic email employ employed employee employing employs end endless enemy enforcement engineering engineers entwined equipped established even example examples exist exists expensive experience exploit explored expressed face facing fact false famous fate feet felt fewer fielded fifteen fight finding firewall first foe foes following following: foothold forces form forty france frank from fundamental further gain gaining game gen get going good greasy group groups guard guerilla hackers has hat have hegemony hiding him his his history host how however hungrily identify identifying impact importance include include: increasingly indeed indicated inextricably inferior information install instructive insurgency insurgents intelligence intense invaders involve iraq iraqis irregular irrelevant its julius just key kinetic kitson knees largely layer lead learned least less lesser lies like linear logging looks losing losses mahanian majority man many mao masters math mathematically may means mechanism medieval medina meet men mere merits might militarily militaristic military mindset mine minutes missiles mode modified moist moment moot more most motivated motivations move movement much multiple must napoleon national naval near nearly necessary neck need needs network new newest nor not now obvious obviously occupy off offices; often one onto open operating operations: opponent opponents opposed organization organizations original other out paramount parity patching phishing pimmerman planet playing policies posited position possible posts potential powerful powers practice prepared pressed prevented previous previously primmerman primmerman’s problem processes profound projecting proposition protect protection provided prussia prussian purely purposes put question quotation quote ranks ransomware rare rather real recently recognize reduction referring refers related relevant render rendering represents require resist resistance resources respective respond resting reverently rice ridge rifle risks routing said same sandaled sausage scenario scientists script seams seated security seen sense serious service shirt shorts should side significant silently similar simple simply since sir social soiled solutions somalia some sophisticated soviet specifically spectrum spew sports standard start state stated statement statements: states states: stave step storm strategies strategy strengths stronger struggled struggling stuck stud |
| Tags | Ransomware Vulnerability Threat Patching Guideline |
| Stories | |
| Notes | |
| Move | 
|
L'article ne semble pas avoir été repris aprés sa publication.
L'article ne semble pas avoir été repris sur un précédent.