by Giles Trendle ,© KAM Ltd 2002, All rights 
      reserved 
    Monday, 9th September 2002 - The move towards military 
      action against Iraq is raising the possibility of an increase in electronic 
      attacks by activists or hacking groups sympathetic to Iraq or opposed to 
      any military attack. 
    One such hacker, interviewed by e-mail for this article, warned 
      that Western governments and businesses should brace themselves for 'suicide 
      cyber attacks' in the event of a war against Iraq. He defined a 'suicide 
      cyber attack' as one in which the hacker sets out to cause maximum damage 
      unhindered by any regard for being detected and caught. The hacker who issued 
      this stark warning belongs to a group calling itself the Iron Guards which 
      has in the past attacked Israeli government and business websites as part 
      of the Arab-Israeli cyberwar. 
    Such talk may be no more than rhetorical swagger. Yet some 
      indicators already point to an escalation of digital attacks. mi2g, a London-based 
      company specialising in Internet security, has recorded August 2002 as the 
      worst month for overt digital attacks ever since its records began in 1995. 
      "It would seem highly likely that the launch 
      of a physical attack on Iraq will see counter-attacks from disgruntled Arab, 
      Islamic fundamentalist and anti-American groups," concludes 
      DK Matai, Chairman and CEO of mi2g. 
    Hacking comes under what military theorists refer to as 'asymmetric 
      warfare', in which unconventional tactics are used by smaller players to 
      counter the overwhelming conventional military superiority of an adversary. 
      Like a classic guerrilla struggle, such digital warfare is a conflict of 
      the weak against the strong, in which the weaker force probes and attacks 
      the vulnerable points in its enemy's defences. 
    The Achilles Heel of modern technology appears to be that 
      no computer system is totally invulnerable to being 'cracked'. This has 
      raised fears that hacking might enable an individual or small group to wreak 
      havoc in terms of defacing or 'downing' government websites, spreading viruses 
      and worms that infect and disrupt computer systems, or even using the Internet 
      as a direct instrument of death by taking remote control of systems operating 
      dam floodgates or air traffic control. 
    The IT proficiency of militant Islamic hackers was recently 
      raised by American officials who admitted they have underestimated the amount 
      of attention al-Qaeda was paying to the internet. "Al-Qaeda 
      spent more time mapping our vulnerabilities in cyberspace than we previously 
      thought," said Roger Cressey, the chief of staff of 
      the White House critical infrastructure protection board, in a recent interview 
      with the Washington Post. "The question 
      is a question of when, not if." 
    The National Infrastructure Security Co-ordination Centre 
      (NISCC), an interdepartmental organisation created by the Home Secretary 
      in 1999 with the task of protecting the UK's infrastructure from electronic 
      attack, says it is keeping this threat under constant review. 
    In a statement for this article, the NISCC said: 
      "Although the UK is increasingly vulnerable to electronic attacks, 
      like other technologically advanced societies, there is nothing to suggest 
      that the UK's critical national infrastructure, including government, is 
      at risk of widespread and disruptive electronic attack should the UK participate 
      in any possible military campaign against Iraq." 
    The NISCC added, however, that in the event of a war on Iraq, 
      what it called 'Islamic extremists' - or any other hacking groups - "may 
      be motivated to carry out less sophisticated attacks such as website defacements 
      or denial of service attacks." In other words, there 
      may be more digital attacks, but nothing to get overly-worried about at 
      this point in time. 
    The e-Envoy's office also says it is active vis-à-vis 
      any cyber threat. "The government has developed 
      a set of Security Frameworks to provide a common approach to security for 
      eGovernment services, which the Office of the e-Envoy is publishing," 
      said a source from the e-Envoy's office. "We 
      believe that we are building adequate security measures into our services, 
      but no-one can afford to be complacent." 
    Some experts in the private sector feel that hysteria is as 
      bad as complacency. "I think the media 
      overplays the hype associated with cyberterrorism," says 
      Clifford May, chief forensic consultant at Integralis, an IT security company 
      in the UK. "Large organisations may be 
      an attractive target, but they have very strong security in place." 
      
    The website Vmyths.com (www.vmyths.com) has a self-declared 
      goal of the "eradication of computer virus hysteria." With acerbic 
      wit, the industry writers at Vmyths seek to expose what they feel lies behind 
      the hullabaloo about computer security: namely, media ignorance, scare-mongering 
      consultants and profit-seeking antivirus companies. 
    So will war on Iraq lead to an e-jihad against eGovernment? 
      There may possibly be more digital attacks, but the levels of skill and 
      efficacy of such attacks remains unclear. Hackers - like the Al-Qaeda network 
      - can be dispersed, nebulous and elusive. Such a threat, because it is unseen, 
      creates uncertainty and where there is uncertainty there is room for fear 
      (and fear-mongering). 
    The response to cyber-threats from American and British officials 
      may appear different. American officials seem more ready to conceive (even 
      predict) the possibility of a devastating and catastrophic attack by cyberterrorists. 
      The White House advisor for cyberspace security recently referred to the 
      possibility of a 'digital Pearl Harbour'. British cyber-officials, on the 
      other hand, maintain a more reserved tone. Hopefully, the difference between 
      us and the Americans is one of cultural expression, and not in any way one 
      of professional diligence. 
    Giles Trendle is a former Middle East war correspondent 
      who today writes and speaks on advocacy networks and anti-corporate activism. 
      His website is http://www.globalprofile.co.uk/ 
      
    Giles Trendle's independent opinion appears courtesy of 
      Prospect - a recruitment consultancy committed to 'enabling better features' 
      and sourcing the people to drive eGovernment. For further information go 
      to http://www.prospectmsl.com/ 
      or email info@prospectmsl.com