Dismantling of Saudi-CIA Web site illustrates need for clearer cyberwar policies

[Renew Deal]

Source: Washington Post

By early 2008, top U.S. military officials had become convinced that extremists planning attacks on American forces in Iraq were making use of a Web site set up by the Saudi government and the CIA to uncover terrorist plots in the kingdom.

"We knew we were going to be forced to shut this thing down," recalled one former civilian official, describing tense internal discussions in which military commanders argued that the site was putting Americans at risk. "CIA resented that," the former official said.

Elite U.S. military computer specialists, over the objections of the CIA, mounted a cyberattack that dismantled the online forum. Although some Saudi officials had been informed in advance about the Pentagon's plan, several key princes were "absolutely furious" at the loss of an intelligence-gathering tool, according to another former U.S. official.

Four former senior U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss classified operations, said the creation and shutting down of the site illustrate the need for clearer policies governing cyberwar. The use of computers to gather intelligence or to disrupt the enemy presents complex questions: When is a cyberattack outside the theater of war allowed? Is taking out an extremist Web site a covert operation or a traditional military activity? Should Congress be informed?

"The point of the story is it hasn't been sorted out yet in a way that all the persons involved in cyber-operations have a clear understanding of doctrine, legal authorities and policy, and a clear understanding of the distinction between what is considered intelligence activity and wartime authority," said one former senior national security official.
<snip>



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/18/AR2010031805464.html

---

From Slashdot:

Hugh Pickens writes "Ellen Nakashima has an interesting story in the Washington Post about US military computer specialists, who over the objections of the CIA, mounted a cyberattack that dismantled an online "honey pot" monitored by US and Saudi intelligence agencies to identify extremists before they could strike after military commanders said that the site was putting Americans at risk. The CIA argued that dismantling the site would lead to a significant loss of intelligence while the NSA countered that taking it down was a legitimate operation in defense of US troops. "The CIA didn't endorse the idea of crippling Web sites," says one US counterterrorism official. The agency "understood that intelligence would be lost, and it was; that relationships with cooperating intelligence services would be damaged, and they were; and that the terrorists would migrate to other sites, and they did." Four former senior US officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss classified operations, said the creation and shutting down of the site illustrates the need for clearer policies governing cyberwar. When is a cyberattack outside the theater of war allowed? Is taking out an extremist Web site a covert operation or a traditional military activity? Some experts say that dismantling Web sites is ineffective — no sooner does a site come down than a mirror site pops up somewhere else. "You can't really shut down this process for more than 24 or 48 hours," said Evan F. Kohlmann, a terrorism researcher. "It seems difficult to understand why governments would interrupt what everyone acknowledges now to be a lucrative intelligence-gathering tool.""

http://tech.slashdot.org/submission/1196682/US-Military-Shuts-Down-CIAs-Terrorist-Honey-Pot

So basically the military attacked a CIA site because they considered it a threat :banghead:

[PreacherCasey]

1. Cyberwar my ass. They're hyping this on purpose to bring in Internet 2.

This is the new war on terror boogyman. Be afraid.