10

5 comments

[–] PMYA [OP] 3 points (+3|-0)

NSA*

They have cyber command in the same building because they need to sign off on offensive operations conducted by the NSA. This is interesting because you would imagine that there is some form of crossover or more likely active co-operation between cyber command and the NSA. Splitting them in two essentially removes the NSA as a player in most offensive operations unless they're directly tasked with doing something.

So my questions are: Can cyber command operate as effectively without the NSA, will they be moving NSA people into cyber command and who is actually going to control it? Up until this point it has been under the jurisdiction of the NSA director, as far as I know.

[–] jidlaph 1 points (+1|-0)

NSA*

Oh I know they're talking about NSA in the article.

As far as I can tell the NSA is officially limited to signals monitoring and cyberdefense; presumably this new department will be playing offense.
I'm curious how it affects the CIA department that create the Vault7 fiasco, since it seemed to exist in a legal grey area. This could move most cyberoffense functions explicitly out of the CIA's jurisdiction.

[–] PMYA [OP] 0 points (+0|-0) Edited

As far as I can tell the NSA is officially limited to signals monitoring and cyberdefense

Nope. Stuxnet came from the NSA. People within the NSA have said that a lot of what the NSA does isn't even remotely related to defence, it is actively sabotaging other countries. The reason it is happening is because everything is a grey area at the moment. "Everyone is doing what they think they can get away with".

Edit: Regarding the CIA, I highly doubt that all offensive operations would stop. It isn't practical to keep going to cyber command with stuff all the time, and these agencies by nature are fairly autonomous due to the way they try and retain information.