Eugene Gritton, Richard O. Hundley, Richard F. Mesic, Roger C. Molander, Kevin O'Connell, Peter Wilson
Data in this appendix may not be duplicated or used in whole or in part for any purpose without the written permission of RAND. This restriction does not limit any individual's right to use information contained in the data if it is obtained from another source without restriction.The "Day After..." methodology requires a realistic scenario; however, specific companies, systems, or system components appearing in this scenario are examples only and their appearance implies no unique capability or vulnerability. Attribution to any organization or entity shall not be made as a result of the text contained herein.
Situation Report
Instructions
Memo for the SECDEF
(Note: Step Two is provided on site.)
Instructions
Memo for the SECDEF
"The Day After..." exercise methodology has been developed to explore new and evolving post-Cold War international security problems, in particular in the realm of new types of strategic warfare.
This version of the exercise methodology is based on a two-step process generally lasting a total of approximately four to five hours.
Participants in the exercises take on the role of advisors to a senior-level decision-maker (or decision-making body) in a group deliberative process akin to a classic time-constrained "pre-meeting" where the principal task is to finalize a document or set of materials (e.g., an issues and options paper) for a formal deliberative/decision-making meeting (such as a National Security Council meeting).
In general, two or more groups (of nominally 6-12 individuals under the leadership of a chairperson) go through the identical exercise at the same time and compare the character and results of their deliberations at the end of each of the steps.
(2) on prospective current/near-term R&D-related strategy and policy initiatives that would address existing and projected strategic vulnerabilities in the U.S. defense and national information infrastructures (STEP TWO).
The group's STEP ONE task is to revise a draft of a memo from the SECDEF to the President on possible short-term fixes to the pressing cyberspace technical issues that have emerged in this crisis.
In the context of this tasking group, consensus on the text of the memo and recommendations to go forward to the SECDEF is desirable but not necessary. Where consensus cannot be achieved, the group notes and conveys forward the prevailing differences for final decision-making by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with the Director of ARPA.
In "the day before" (STEP TWO) of the exercise, the context changes to the present or near future.
In this more contemporary context, the group is again convened as a team with another time-constrained tasking. This group must revise and improve a memo which is going from the Director of ARPA to the Secretary of Defense immediately in advance of a cabinet- level meeting where it is intended that the President decide on a new national R&D initiative investment strategy for information systems security, to be manifest in a set of new initiatives on:
(2) New operational concepts and practices based on new technological opportunities, and
(3) New R&D initiatives and new R&D priorities
The objective in this last step is to seek initiatives that would help minimize the prospect that future crises such as that just faced would occur--or, if they do, to mitigate their consequences, and reduce the likelihood that they would ever occur again.

| Phase One Deterrent Phase | Phase Two Initial Defense | Phase Three Full Capability | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Army |
Navy |
Air Force |
Marine Corps |
Troop Strength | 50,000 | +100,000 = 150,000 | +150,000 =
300,000 | Time to Complete | (from t=0) 7 Days | 30 Days | 60 Days | CRAF | Aircraft Req't 0 | 120 | 200 | |
The Caracas OPEC meeting ended in total failure and disarray after three days of tense discussions marked by a final televised shouting match between the Iranian and Saudi oil ministers.
On May 8 the Saudi ruler called in the U.S. Ambassador and expressed his deep concerns about the Iranians whom he feared might use the OPEC stalemate as an excuse for "a move of greatness" in the Gulf.
On May 10, Tehran radio and television announced that the Iranian Foreign Minister was flying to Riyadh with an "urgent proposal" that would "resolve the OPEC stalemate" and "respond to the evolving security situation in the region."
On the evening of May 10, the U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia reported on the contents of the Iranian "proposal:"
At 2030 local time on May 11, Saudi Arabia ordered the redeployment of one armored division toward its border with Iraq and a partial mobilization of selected reserve elements. Two hours later Kuwait placed its army and reserves on a higher level of alert.
In a message to the Secretary of State the U.S. Ambassador in Cairo noted that there was considerable uncertainty about whether the blackout was the product of "deliberate sabotage or just Egyptian bad luck."
On the Saudi problem the CIA had "preliminary indications" that a hidden "trap door" was used that had apparently been placed into the latest release of code controlling many switching centers of the Saudi PSN. This code allows unauthorized passwords to be used to gain access through remote maintenance ports. The source of this problem was unclear although a radical anti-interventionist group claimed responsibility on the Internet.
Twelve Saudi F-15s arrived on the scene in minutes and in the ensuing battle both of the Saudi gunboats and three Iranian ships were sunk. Minutes later fifteen Iranian MiG-29s and 31s arrived and in the air battle that followed nine Iranian aircraft were downed at the cost of five Saudi F-15s.
At 0630 local time on the 12th, a S-3B Viking from the CBG Ronald Reagan was fired upon by an Iran missile frigate while conducting a maritime surveillance mission over the Straits of Hormuz.
Thirty minutes later, F/A-18s and F/A-14s from the Reagan found the frigate some fifteen miles south of Bandar Abbas. The USN aircraft were confronted by eight Iranian MiG-29s. During the short air battle three MiG-29s were shot down and the frigate was sunk after receiving three Harpoon missile hits.
This event was followed by a "war communiqué" from a radical Islamic group linked to Iran asserting that "the enemies of the true faith of Islam were vulnerable to the full range of Islamic might." The statement concluded with the threat that the economy of the Saudi Kingdom "could be brought to its knees with the touch of a button."
In a memcon to the Secretary of State, the U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia warned that the Saudi elite was "horrified by the prospect that Iran might have the capacity to severely disrupt their economy without firing a shot" and beginning to express concerns that the United States may be "unable to help the Saudi government respond to this new threat."
The notes to the leaders of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia also included a separate and explicit message that Iran would soon "demonstrate the futility of depending upon the American imperialists for protection from modern weapons systems."
Early that afternoon local time, Iran fired three Nodong I MRBMs virtually simultaneously from a field site south of Tehran. Two of the three successfully deployed previously unseen exoatmospheric penetration aids.
Within three hours, the CIA issued a preliminary report indicating there was "clear evidence" that the freight train had been misrouted onto the passenger track with "some evidence" pointing to a sophisticated intrusion into the Bundesbahn rail control system.
In passing the report to the President that evening the National Security Advisor noted that "NSA had considerable doubts about the origin of the attack." Further, he noted that the CIA's Foreign Terrorism Center was preparing a report voicing the strong suspicion that the tragedy was the product of a conspiracy which "may or may not be connected with the unfolding events in the Persian Gulf."
The London Stock Exchange Index fell 10% in late trading on the 16th with investors shifting assets to safer havens.
At 1500 the oil futures market closed with the spot oil price at $75 a barrel. Gold prices for the day were up ten percent.
At 1700 the Security and Exchange Commission(SEC)'s crisis investigating team informed the Secretary of Commerce that "a pattern of institutional investment manipulation involving as yet unknown parties working through a set of European and Middle Eastern Banks" had been "a leading factor in the rapid acceleration in the Dow's mid-afternoon decline."
Two hours later the Consortium submitted a formal request to the U.S. Park Police for a permit for the Mall for May 21 for a "demonstration of support for mediation and opposition to U.S. intervention in Saudi Arabia" for "an estimated 100,000 participants." By nightfall similar permits had been requested in ten other major U.S. cities.
Approval of the Mall and other CPP requests seemed certain and mobilization of CPP chapters began to occur through communiqués sent over the Internet and more traditional media outlets.
The meeting opened with an intelligence briefing by the DCI who emphasized the uncertainty in the source or sources of the attack and noted that at this time there was "no way of knowing for sure" whether what we are seeing is:
(2) The beginning of a dedicated IW campaign to derail anticipated U.S. Gulf deployment plans, or
(3) Most of what we can expect from a strategic IW campaign mounted by Iran or others."
The CJCS Chairman immediately emphasized that the Time Phased Force Deployment List (TPFDL) for GREEN HORNET was very dependent on the ability to meet "a host of just-in-time logistic timelines" and would not tolerate "any significant disruption."
He also expressed growing concern about the problem of mobilizing the CRAF aircraft and crews that were "key to Phase II of GREEN HORNET" if someone were able to penetrate the management information systems of major U.S. airlines.
In the highly speculative discussion that immediately followed it became very clear that in spite of "circumstantial evidence" pointing to Iran there remained considerable uncertainty about the extent of Iranian involvement in the recent IW incidents.
The discussion eventually turned to the military situation in the Gulf where after further reviewing the military and diplomatic issues on the table, the President announced the following decisions:
The President then led a further in-depth discussion of the IW situation in which he expressed particular concerns about the long- and short-term implications of possible successful IW attacks against U.S. and allied Persian Gulf deployment plans and the national information infrastructures of the U.S. and its European allies and key coalition partners in the Gulf region. He emphasized the need to "demonstrate persuasively and as soon as possible" that further IW attacks such as those already experienced would not be able to fundamentally undermine U.S. military strategy in the current crisis.
During the discussion the President strongly admonished the Press Secretary to "keep the lid on" and "downplay all speculation" regarding both the extent of U.S. cyberspace vulnerabilities and the origins of the IW attacks experienced to date especially those in the U.S. He noted that further decisions on the crisis could be made even more difficult if there were public panic growing out of "media hyping" of the IW threat to the U.S. and attributing the attacks to date to Iran when the actual source might be "domestic anti-interventionist political forces."
In closing the meeting the President turned to the SECDEF and asked him to see if he could pull together some information security experts to generate "new or creative ideas" that could be brought to bear "in the near term" on the IW problems of principal concern in the crisis.
Another NSC meeting was scheduled for late the next morning to review the results of the trilateral discussions and again address the IW problem.
Upon leaving the meeting, the SECDEF contacted the Director of ARPA and instructed him to immediately assemble a tiger team of information system security experts to address the IW- related issues and concerns that had come up at the NSC meeting. The SECDEF described the President's principal concerns and asked for recommendations on possible "near-term creative solutions" to the problems posed "beyond the standard procedures to tighten information systems security that the services and the CINCs would be likely to take on their own."
1. You have been selected as a member of a technical tiger team advising the Secretary of Defense and the Director of ARPA, in a time-urgent process. The group's task is to revise a draft memo to the SECDEF in preparation for the ARPA Director's meeting with the SECDEF scheduled for a few hours hence.
2. The group's tasking is to produce an assessment for the SECDEF to send to the President proposing possible short-term technical solutions to these pressing cyberspace problems.
2. The Chair will ask one participant to record the results of the group's deliberations and recommendations.
3. The Chair will likely begin by asking for participants in her/his group to very briefly (e.g., in a few sentences) give their individual perspectives on the overall situation and the particular challenge presented to the group.
Under the guidance of the Chair, the group should discuss and expand this Draft Memo as judged appropriate. In particular the Chair should ascertain whether there are other critical issues beyond those presented which the SECDEF might bring up at this point in time--and modify the Draft Memo accordingly.
It should be kept in mind that the group is not being convened primarily as a decision-making body; the group's principal responsibility is to craft a good issues and options memo to send forward to the President.
When the time for STEP ONE is up, the Chair of each group will be asked to summarize very concisely the group's deliberations and recommendations. This summary should be brief--if at all possible, not more than five minutes.
19 May 2000
FROM: Secretary of Defense
SUBJECT: Tiger Team Recommendations on Persian Gulf Crisis - Information Warfare Issues
PRINCIPAL IW-RELATED OBJECTIVES Consistent with your public statement and guidance at previous NSC meetings, my guidance to the team was that our principal long-term objectives in this situation in terms of IW are:
|
I also told them that your principal short-term objectives in terms of IW are:
In response to the tasking summarized above, below you will find a set of recommended near-term actions for your consideration along with preliminary assessment of possible implementation obstacles. The issues and recommendations have been organized as follows:
II. Issues Related to IW Tactical Warning/Attack Assessment
III. Issues Related to Strategic IW Attacks on the U.S. NII
IV. Issues Related to Strategic IW Attacks on Allies and Coalition Partners
You expressed particular concern about the tight timelines for both the GREEN HORNET and SILVER SABRE deployment plans and the possible vulnerability of these plans to disruption by IW attack by either the Iranians, the CIRD, or domestic political forces opposed to Western intervention in the Gulf crisis.
As you are aware from earlier assessments, we do not at this point know the full extent of the capacity of any of these entities to disrupt a U.S. deployment to the Gulf. We have already seen one kind of attack--the mass dialing attack on the base phone system at Ft. Lewis, WA--that could potentially cause problems if widespread (i.e., if it occurred at a large number of U.S. military bases involved in GREEN HORNET) and sustained for many days.
In examining the different elements of the GREEN HORNET and SILVER SABRE deployment plans we see potentially serious IW-related problems in the following areas:
The second "Initial Defense" phase is more complex and potentially more vulnerable to disruption both here in the United States (since it involves CRAF aircraft and far more extensive rail and air transport of troops and equipment) and in Europe (since it involves U.S. forces stationed in Europe and the British and French Silver SABRE forces). The same is true of the third deployment phase which is necessary to achieve full offensive and defensive capability in the Gulf region. The amount of communications involved (relating to logistics and transportation and other logistics matters) is also much greater in both of these phases than in the initial deployment phase which raises more serious PSN concerns.
The recommendations of the tiger team in terms of possible near- term technical responses to these GREEN HORNET/SILVER SABRE IW- related problems (and possible implementation obstacles) are as follows:
| A. DII Issues | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended Technical Response | Possible Implementation Obstacles | ||||||||
| 1. Close all possible firewalls to and within DII systems |
2. Disable all remote dial-in maintenance ports on DII system
telecommunications switches |
3. Provide 24-hr. system operator monitoring and overview of
all critical information system nodes with special attention paid
to detecting disruptions and abnormal system
behavior | 4. |
5. | |
| B. Other Related U.S. NII Issues | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended Technical Response | Possible Implementation Obstacles | ||||||
| 1. (re PSN) Route all critical GREEN HORNET Phase Two/Three communications over available robust command and control channels rather than relying on the U.S. PSN | | 2. (re ATCS) |
3.(re CRAF) |
4. (re Power Grid) | |
| C. Allied/Coalition Partner Information Systems Issues | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended Technical Response | Possible
Implementation Obstacles| 1. (re European PSN's) | 2. (re European ATCS's) | 3. | |
II. ISSUES RELATED TO IW TACTICAL WARNING/ATTACK ASSESSMENT (TW/AA)
You have indicated that among your main concerns was an inability to identify the source(s) of the various IW attacks that have recently taken place and the total absence of any warning relating to these attacks. This has given rise to related uncertainties as to whether the attacks represented Iranian (or other potential sources) testing of their IW capability, the beginnings of a much larger IW campaign, or most of what we might have to deal with in terms of strategic IW attacks during the current crisis.
The tiger team judged that the tactical warning/attack assessment (TW/AA) problem to be extremely difficult. In approaching this issue, they concluded that existing legal constraints or impediments to this problem might be removed in crisis in order to have any hope of improving the TW/AA situation.
The recommendations of the ARPA tiger team in terms of possible near-term technical responses to these tactical warning/attack assessment (TW/AA) IW-related problems are as follows:
| TW/AA Issues | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended Technical Response | Possible Implementation Obstacles | ||
1. (re Tactical Warning)
| | 2. (re Attack Assessment) | |
III. ISSUES RELATED TO STRATEGIC IW ATTACKS ON THE U.S. NII
You expressed particular concern about the domestic political impact, and thus the broad political-military impact in the crisis, of successful strategic IW attacks against key elements of the U.S. NII--and the resultant loss of the national sanctuary that the American people have enjoyed for nearly two centuries.
With this perspective in mind, the tiger team looked at possible near-term measures to enhance the security of the key elements of the U.S. NII relating to: (1) the PSN, (2) the transportation system, (3) the electric power grid, and (4) the oil and gas pipeline system.
The recommendations of the team in terms of possible near-term technical responses to possible strategic IW attacks on the U.S. NII are as follows:
| U.S. NII Strategic IW Attack Issues | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended Technical Response | Possible Implementation Obstacles | ||||||
1. (re the PSN)| 2. (re Transportation Systems) | 4. (re the Electric Power
Grid) | 5. (re the Oil and Gas Pipeline
System | |
IV. ISSUES RELATED TO STRATEGIC IW ATTACKS ON ALLIES AND COALITION PARTNERS
Our European allies and regional coalition partners Saudi Arabia and Egypt appear already to be in the throes of some kind of strategic IW campaign designed to weaken their resolve in the crisis.
The approach that the tiger team took to this problem was as follows:
| Allies/Coalition Partners NII Strategic IW Attack Issues | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended Technical Response | Possible Implementation Obstacles | ||||
1. (re the Saudi PSN)
|
That morning the automatic tellers of the largest bank chain in Georgia malfunctioned with bank clients being debited and/or credited thousands of the dollars after each ATM transaction--leading the bank to shut down its ATM network. Bank officials stated that it must have been "an inside job" since they had recently installed a new release of the ATM software about three weeks ago and suspected a logic bomb triggered by some means.
Early that afternoon the CNN news center feed out of Atlanta was intermittently off the air for twelve minutes.
On May 20 DoD discovered that the computer data base for the Time Phased Force Deployment List (TPFDL) had become plagued with "corrupt data." The JCS IW planning cell's initial report on the problem indicated that a computer worm--origin uncertain-- had likely been unleashed inside the TPFDL software through a personal computer temporarily linked to the TPFDL system running popular commercial off-the-shelf database software with a known security flaw.
On the morning of May 21 the U.S. Ambassador in Egypt notified the Secretary of State that the President of Egypt had become "very concerned about Iran's capacity to cause economic and political damage in Egypt."
That morning the Pentagon first revealed their concerns about delays in military deployments to the Gulf due to IW attacks on the local area networks and phone systems of a number of key Army and Marine bases.
Early in the afternoon of May 21 a new Continental Airlines AB- 340 making a final instrumented approach to O'Hare International Airport suffered a massive malfunction in its flight deck avionics and minutes later crashed in a residential area killing all 236 passengers and crew and 36 people on the ground.
Later that day the FAA grounded all late model AB-340 and 330 aircraft on the basis that the flight control software might be infected by a sophisticated logic bomb.
That evening the Justice Department reported the interrogation of two suspects at a San Antonio, Texas software firm which had provided the most recent update of the AB- 340 flight control software. (Both had recently received large cash payments through a Swiss bank.) Although the source code for the flight control software had been checked line-by- line before installation, the two suspects apparently had access to the compiler, and presumably modified it to cause unauthorized actions in the compiled control software.
The May 21 CPP "anti-intervention" demonstration in Washington drew a crowd estimated by the U.S. Park Police at over 400,000. Many other well-attended demonstrations in both large and small cities across the country were also organized via the Internet.
(2) Operation FORCE FIELD - a theater-wide command and control attack plan.
A highly contentious debate on both operations followed but no decisions were taken on either operation.
That same day the Saudi public switched network began to fail again. The failure was attributed to unauthorized modification of the system through trap doors in the logic controlling its switches - which were very similar to those found earlier in the failure of the Saudi PSN." (The Saudi telecom system was purchased from the same company supplying approximately 30% of the U.S. PSN.)
By that evening the self-described "Provisional Islamic Republic of Arabia" had seized power in Dhahran and Mecca.
That evening saw the beginning of heavy fighting in Riyadh between security police and members of the National Guard which had pledged their loyalty to the new Provisional Islamic Republic. Within hours the U.S. Ambassador reported that fighting was spreading rapidly throughout the city and that a coup attempt was underway.
At a mid-morning Atlanta news conference the members of the "Executive Council" of the Consortium for Planetary Peace announcing that the CPP was "mobilizing all of its chapters to conduct civil disobedience actions to stop the U.S. Government's mad dash to war to save an undemocratic and failed Saudi regime."
At 1230 EDT on the 23rd the Chicago Commodity Exchange experienced its wildest fluctuations in history and halted trading on the grounds that the Exchange was apparently being subjected to a powerful form of electronic manipulation by unknown parties.
In mid-afternoon the entire phone network in the Washington/Baltimore region including local cellular systems failed. The attack was attributed to trap doors not unlike those that caused the earlier PSN failure in Saudi Arabia. Preliminary indications were that only 70% of the switches were disabled, but that remaining carriers and switches could not handle the additional load.
At 1700 EDT the President asked the National Security Advisor to arrange an NSC Meeting for the next morning so he could "assess the overall situation and especially our defensive IW prospects" in order to decide on "next steps" in the crisis.
It is now 1900 on May 23, 2000.
1. You will have a total of two hours for STEP TWO --roughly 10 minutes for reading and the remainder of the two hours for deliberations.
2. The time period is the very near future--say the late spring of 1996.
3. You are again in the role of a top advisor to the Director of ARPA, preparing him for a meeting with the Secretary of Defense on a national R&D investment strategy for information systems security and related issues.
4. The Chair will lead a discussion that moves through the tasking described in the Decisions to Be Made section to the right--which follows essentially the same basic process as the previous two steps.
The staff-prepared Draft Memo for the Secretary of Defense (on the pages immediately following) is designed to serve this purpose.
Under the guidance of the Chair, the group should discuss this Draft Memo and expand and modify it as judged appropriate.
When it is clear to the Chair that there is a division of views on an issue, vote on the options still on the table and record the vote.
xx XXXXXX 1996 MEMORANDUM FOR: The Secretary of Defense
FROM: Director, Advanced Research Projects Agency
SUBJECT: A Research Strategy Addressing Threats to National Security and Safety from New Techniques of Information Warfare
The recently completed interagency study on this subject emphasized that our national interests are increasingly dependent on a set of information systems critical not only to U.S. military operations but also more broadly to U.S. health, safety, and commerce. A range of critical U.S. information systems appear to be vulnerable to a spectrum of possible IW attacks, including disruption and denial of service, implanting false data, covert installation of harmful programs (e.g., viruses), and the outright theft of information. Unlike other threats to U.S. national security, the "cost of entry" to potential attackers is extremely low, enabling attacks to be initiated by a wide range of sources including other nations, "hackers," terrorists, zealots, disgruntled insiders, criminals, and commercial organizations. Because of the unconventional nature of this new strategic threat, it is increasingly clear that traditional R&D approaches are not fully appropriate to assessing risks and devising counters to specific threats. Another problem is that "cyberspace" transcends our national borders and has traditionally been a forum exhibiting and facilitating freedom of interconnection and expression. There are no current regulations or licensing provisions governing who can connect to the Internet, much less government-mandated systems and security provisions. This raises questions as to how aggressive the U.S. can or should be in pursuing the imposition of restrictions or technical solutions on cyberspace. The set of research approaches set forth below attempt to give structure and clarity to several key facets of this complex problem that would appear to warrant near-term attention.
|
In the items below we have identified several key issues that relate explicitly to the overall question of investment strategy.
1.1 Commercial Software
Although substantial security techniques and devices have been developed, by and large they are not incorporated in the widely used commercially available operating systems and programs (e.g., Windows 95; commercial UNIX systems). To be effective, existing technology and procedures should become widespread.
What steps should the U.S. and DoD take to ensure that known security technology becomes embedded in widely-available commercial operating systems and applications?
__________ B. ______________________________________
_________________________________________________
__________ C. ______________________________________
__________________________________________________
Possible implementation obstacles for this option: ________________________________________________
In addition (on the matter of commercial software issues) ARPA recommends:
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
1.2 Minimum Essential Information Infrastructure
Broad benefits have been derived from the open information architecture and information-sharing that has to date characterized the evolution of the NII and the GII. Retaining these benefits, while meeting the critical needs of cyberspace safety and security, poses a major challenge.
In this context a key issue for near-term decision is whether to launch an effort to establish a Minimum Essential Information Infrastructure (MEII) to meet a variety of national security emergency preparedness needs--for example, ensuring that regional force deployments that depend heavily on the operations of segments of the NII are resilient to attack. Such an MEII would be analogous to the Minimum Essential Emergency Communications Network (MEECN) that was designed to insure the execution of U.S. nuclear war plans.
There are, however, serious questions as to whether key NII infrastructure components are too interdependent to isolate a manageable subset as "minimum essential." One approach to this problem might be to select the parts of the NII most critical to military and civilian operations and then defending them by whatever means appropriate and affordable. As an example, a portion of the infrastructure might be placed on dedicated fiber optic cables with protected input/output switches procured by the Defense Department to ensure essential point-to-point communications to enhance force deployment capabilities. In addition, modifications to existing laws might allow cooperation between the intelligence community and domestic law enforcement agencies to improve the gathering of intelligence on U.S. citizens who operate in cyberspace performing actions counter to U.S. national interests--or imposes some protection standards. Another component might be a tax incentive to encourage commercial firms to cooperate with U.S government-led protection processes and encourage development of rapid reconstitution capabilities.
The most promising strategy for the U.S. to pursue in developing an MEII would be:
__________ B. Create a separate secure U.S. backbone telecommunication structure to which critical communications may be diverted in an emergency.
__________ C. ____________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________ D _____________________________________
__________________________________________________
The ARPA recommendation is that we pursue Option _____.
_____________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
1.3 (Subject) _______________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
_____________________________________________
__________ B _________________________________
_____________________________________________
__________ C. ________________________________
_____________________________________________
2.1 Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment (TW/AA)
Information and telecommunications systems--and systems dependent on them--sometimes fail, either catastrophically (e.g., the "Northeast blackout") or more narrowly (one major carrier's long- distance lines were once unavailable for 6 hours). Earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, and other natural phenomena cause disruptions. Given normal exigencies, it may well be difficult to tell whether the U.S. is being subjected to a coordinated IW attack. We should have warning regarding whether we are under attack, and if so by whom.
The following are some possible approaches to TW/AA.
__________ B. Significantly expand the concept of CERTs (Computer Emergency Response Teams) to cover all key national information systems. These provide human analysis and interpretation of events as they are reported by automated information-gathering nodes and reporting by systems administrators.
__________ C. ____________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________ D _____________________________________
__________________________________________________
_____________________________________________
Substantial research and development programs in computer and network security have been undertaken--by ARPA and others--over the past 20 years, yet the vast majority of computers and networks in use within the U.S. and its information infrastructure are insecure. Reasons for this include: (1) inertia; (2) lack of perception of a problem--benefits do not appear to outweigh costs for any individual site or organization; (3) no central point of control; (4) lax operational procedures, including physical security.
If we are to have greater information assurance in our systems, in addition to addressing technical solutions these "people and procedures" aspects of the problem must also be addressed as well as technical solutions:
__________ B. "Make 'em feel it." Develop, support and encourage "red-teams" to attack key portions of our national information infrastructure to demonstrate security flaws in systems and operational procedures, with ensuing embarrassment and possible sanctions for those found inadequate;
__________ C. ____________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________ D _____________________________________
__________________________________________________
________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
2.3. (Subject)_______________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
_____________________________________________
__________ B _________________________________
_____________________________________________
__________ C. ________________________________
_____________________________________________
In the items below we have identified several possible new R&D initiatives (or new R&D priorities) to enhance information systems security.
3.1 Trusted Insiders
Trusted insiders are a particular security problem. For less than the cost of a major, targeted computer and network hacking/cracking campaign, it may often be possible to "buy" the services of a disgruntled trusted insider who already possesses the needed passwords, physical access codes, and knowledge of operating procedures.
The basic options for countering this weakness in many infrastructure information systems are:
__________ B. Research on "tamper-proof" audit trails and system monitoring devices that cannot be bypassed or defeated by an insider, and will provide warning and evidence of any wrongdoing;
__________ C. ____________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________ D _____________________________________
__________________________________________________
________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
3.2 New Security Techniques
Existing information security techniques (firewalls, encapsulation, multi-level secure operating systems, passwords, etc.) are not widely and effectively employed throughout the key national information systems or in mass-market commercial operating systems and networks, and they are viewed as difficult to use. (The two factors are of course not unrelated.)
There may be fundamentally new techniques upon which the U.S. might base the security of its information infrastructure. Possible examples might include: (1) a "biological immune system" metaphor (currently being explored by some scientists) in which systems have both "barrier" (e.g., skin, cell membrane) defenses and "active" defenses (e.g., generating antibodies tailored to antigens); (2) Detection and rapid recovery; bad things--foreseen and unforeseen--will happen to information systems, rather than protecting against all foreseen dangers, concentrate on designing systems that recover fast enough that ill effects from their downtime or disablement are not severe.
The possible new techniques that the U.S. might explore in pursuit of a breakthrough in national information infrastructure security are:
__________ A. ____________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________ B _____________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
The ARPA recommendation is that we pursue Option _____.
___________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
3.3. (Subject)_______________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
_____________________________________________
__________ B _________________________________
_____________________________________________