DailyTech - FBI: Secondary Internet for Critical Systems Should be Developed

Submit News

Blog: Internet FBI: Secondary Internet for Critical Systems Should be Developed
Michael Hatamoto - October 24, 2011 7:18 AM

8 comment(s) - last by dark matter.. on Oct 30 at 12:42 PM

Government officials are still battling to find long-term methods to counter act cyber attacks

Evolving cyber threats from foreign sources are expected to outpace the government's ability to counter attacks, so other effective options must be made available, government officials recently confirmed.

To counter these computer attacks, a separate Internet network could be developed as a viable solution. Instead of the anonymity and openness of a regular Internet connection, this new network would be more secure from malicious outside sources.

The need for secure computer networks are even more important for government departments, private contractors, US banks and utilities that may benefit from a second, more secure Internet infrastructure.

Even if a new network is available for the government and select industries, the growing problem of malware and computer viruses spread via flash drives and other external sources is a significant problem.

"We can't tech our way out of the cyberthreat," said Shawn Henry, FBI executive assistant director, in an interview with the AP. "The challenge with the Internet is you don't know who's launching the attack."

Enemies to the US currently unable to directly attack the nation's critical networks could however hire organized hackers willing to carry out attacks. Henry wasn't willing to publicly disclose which terrorist groups allegedly tried this technique recently, but it's a legitimate method to try and disrupt operations.

To help counter current Internet-based threats, the Department of Homeland Security chose Mark Weatherford, former North American Electric Reliability Corporation, to head the National Protection and Programs Directorate. Weatherford will be responsible for creating "a safe, secure and resilient cyberspace" for US citizens and companies against cyber attacks.

These efforts are just a part in a continued battle against cyber criminals looking to cripple networks and steal sensitive information as new security enhancements are put in place. However, the effort to better secure US networks from continued cyber threats is a major priority -- and there will be a continued shift of resources towards computer issues.

Sources: AP, DHS Blog

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Okay?

By vol7ron on 10/25/2011 10:56:27 AM , Rating: 3

So build a BusNet (business network)? 1) With how much corporate espionage in place today, I'm not sure it would be difficult for someone to expose those systems to the rest of the network
2) Hackers will find a way, whether they plug in directly to the trunk line, or compromise an exposed computer, they'll find a way
3) Private lines are already in existence, especially business-to-business lines
4) Why not become more secure by not exposing secure information on computers that can be accessed in some way/shape/form by external computers? That is, don't put sensitive information on a network machine.

RE: Okay?

By skirvmi on 10/25/2011 11:09:09 AM , Rating: 2

I am sure there are some systems could benefit from this but the vast majority of the systems would lose their value if you segregate them from the public internet. Multi-homing is not an option either since that eliminates the whole point of security.

Businesses have used PTP/MPLS/VPN connections to create private networks for years. Guess the term "private internet" seems like an oxymoron to me.

Parent

RE: Okay?

By vol7ron on 10/25/2011 11:34:57 AM , Rating: 2

It sounds like they want a separate backbone devoted to this network. Perhaps that would increase at-home throughput/bandwidth, but it would also increase maintenance costs. Perhaps those costs could be applied to the businesses instead of the consumers?

Parent

RE: Okay?

By MrTeal on 10/25/2011 11:53:49 AM , Rating: 4

I guess the idea would be that while you could still attack and compromise the network, you wouldn't be able to do so sitting in China unless you had a physical bridge between this secure network and the normal internet. It wouldn't make it hacker-proof, but it would make it more difficult to attack US assets from any country in the world.

Another benefit I could see is that depending on what they want to connect to this network, there wouldn't necessarily be a need to use standard IP over Ethernet. You could use something like IPsec or work on other Internet/Link layers in order to improve security and traceability.

Parent

Bad Idea

By KOOLTIME on 10/26/2011 3:12:16 PM , Rating: 3

There is no good solution currently that wont cost tax payers at the end of the day billions of dollars. Its an expense thats currently not affordable in our current economy plain and simple truth of it right their.

Not about being more secure, its cost for such an action cant afford it. As placing a new lang haul network would cost trillions, and we dont got that spare change atm.

With technology chaining soon in few years, the long term viability of even doing such is also a mute point. Spend alot now and get taxed more for something that will be outdated even before its fully online.

Bad Idea

By KOOLTIME on 10/26/2011 3:13:52 PM , Rating: 2

There is no good solution currently that wont cost tax payers at the end of the day billions of dollars. Its an expense thats currently not affordable in our current economy plain and simple truth of it right their.

Not about being more secure, its cost for such an action cant afford it. As placing a new long haul network would cost trillions, and we dont got that spare change atm.

With technology chaining soon in few years, the long term viability of even doing such is also a mute point. Spend alot now and get taxed more for something that will be outdated even before its fully online.

Absolutely Horrible Idea

By Jerret on 10/27/2011 7:23:26 PM , Rating: 2

How often do you experience a failure with a multi-homed connection over the ‘public’ internet? Hardly ever. What you do have failures with is equipment at each end of the pipe(s), such as your client machine, router or the servers on the other end.

The internet is an incredible example of how things should work. Connections are much faster, more reliable and less expensive then they were ten years ago. Sure, maybe not at the rate people would like but at a pretty impressive rate nonetheless.

If the government wanted to do something useful they could add incentives for building out additional long-haul trunks or break down barriers to bringing additional power sources into switching centers. They could do this by prioritizing permitting processes to people building higher levels of redundancy or offering free use of public land for development of such resources.

When Verizon was rolling out fiber in my city the biggest impediment was the city itself. I heard this from the operations director responsible for the entire Pacific Northwest build out. I’m ashamed that my city essentially tried to extort additional fees the permitting process.