The Cyber Security Strategy Conundrum

Here is a bit of information many people don’t bother to analyze. When it comes to cyber security, which is better for our country: To hunker down and spend tens of billions on defensive measures to insure every network and every computer system is hack-free? Or to engage in an offensive short-term strategy that cost us little tax dollars but will certainly convince our enemies that we are as capable of harming their countries? Today, the cyber security strategy conundrum is being driven by defense contractors who stand to benefit greatly by strengthening our networks at home instead of an offensive strategy to attack directly the Russian hackers or possibly the Russian State.

On the opposite side of the coin, very few U.S. companies would benefit if the Pentagon just planted bugs across the Russian networks to stop Vladimir Putin from continuously attacking us. It’s all about money. Never mind the efficiency of one strategy over another.

Alperovich call came right after Russian hackers attacked another U.S. infrastructure company few days ago in our food chain supply.

BENEFITS TO SOCIETY

Grant you that training and employing tens of thousands of cyber security experts is beneficial to our society in terms of creating a new generation of skilled workers and lasting employment. This argument is driving today the lobbyists to influence the U.S. Government to spend the billions on creating a new defensive cyber security industry, rather than some experts, like Dmitri Alperovich, who are calling for the U.S. Government to “Release the hounds” to stop Putin from harming further our infrastructure.

Alperovich’s call came right after Russian hackers attacked another U.S. infrastructure company few days ago in our food chain supply. Watch the video below summarizing the logic behind his call.

How to respond to Russian hackers and Vladimir Putin who is giving them sanctuary is probably being debated to death within the U.S. Government; no one seems, however, to make up their minds, which is why the Alperovich experts in America are pushing for tougher and quick measures to protect this country.

Just like President Barack Obama hesitated to implement his red line against the Syrian regime to the long-term detriment of our national security, is it possible that President Biden is following in the same disastrous footsteps?

If the Biden Administration is going on the offensive against the Russian hackers, it should tell the American people so. Nothing like finding a new common enemy to unite this country again.

WHY NOT TWO CYBER SECURITY STRATEGIES?

There is a third option hiding in plain sight. Why not implement both a defensive and an offensive posture with regard to cyber security?

If the Russian hackers attack our infrastructure, we should be able to retaliate immediately and without hesitation. Debating the question to death does not serve our interests.

While protecting the country in real-time, there is nothing wrong with strengthening our computer networks by training and hiring tens of thousands of Americans to make sure, in the future, we resort to an offensive posture as a last resort.

Today, it seems that America is a sitting duck. If the Biden Administration is going on the offensive against the Russian hackers, it should tell the American people so. Nothing like finding a new common enemy to unite this country again instead of reaching for each other’s throats.

Is Ron Klain up to the job? After Afghanistan, we cannot afford another fiasco.

The Cyber Security Strategy Conundrum