The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Jeff Zeitlin (04 Jul 2023 21:48 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Evyn MacDude (04 Jul 2023 23:16 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] David Johnson (04 Jul 2023 23:19 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Rupert Boleyn (05 Jul 2023 00:22 UTC)
The Spinward States (was: The Unbelievability of Virus) David Johnson (05 Jul 2023 04:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Phil Pugliese (05 Jul 2023 00:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Alex Goodwin (05 Jul 2023 09:43 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Alex Goodwin (05 Jul 2023 11:18 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Jeffrey Schwartz (05 Jul 2023 13:06 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Phil Pugliese (05 Jul 2023 17:03 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Evyn MacDude (14 Jul 2023 17:43 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Harold Hale (16 Jul 2023 00:45 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Richard Aiken (18 Jul 2023 04:49 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Phil Pugliese (18 Jul 2023 11:45 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Rupert Boleyn (18 Jul 2023 12:57 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Richard Aiken (18 Jul 2023 14:28 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Rupert Boleyn (18 Jul 2023 19:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] kaladorn@xxxxxx (19 Jul 2023 01:01 UTC)
3I morality (was: The Unbelievability of Virus) David Johnson (19 Jul 2023 01:44 UTC)
Re: [TML] 3I morality (was: The Unbelievability of Virus) kaladorn@xxxxxx (19 Jul 2023 02:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] 3I morality (was: The Unbelievability of Virus) Jeffrey Schwartz (19 Jul 2023 02:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] 3I morality (was: The Unbelievability of Virus) David Johnson (19 Jul 2023 04:23 UTC)
Re: [TML] 3I morality (was: The Unbelievability of Virus) kaladorn@xxxxxx (22 Jul 2023 02:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] 3I morality (was: The Unbelievability of Virus) Phil Pugliese (19 Jul 2023 17:24 UTC)
Re: [TML] 3I morality (was: The Unbelievability of Virus) kaladorn@xxxxxx (22 Jul 2023 02:06 UTC)
Re: [TML] 3I morality (was: The Unbelievability of Virus) Phil Pugliese (19 Jul 2023 17:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Phil Pugliese (18 Jul 2023 15:07 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Rupert Boleyn (18 Jul 2023 19:57 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Phil Pugliese (18 Jul 2023 22:30 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Rupert Boleyn (18 Jul 2023 23:51 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] kaladorn@xxxxxx (19 Jul 2023 00:59 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] kaladorn@xxxxxx (19 Jul 2023 02:03 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Evyn MacDude (23 Jul 2023 07:24 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Jeffrey Schwartz (23 Jul 2023 16:41 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Richard Aiken (23 Jul 2023 18:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Jeffrey Schwartz (25 Jul 2023 16:54 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Rupert Boleyn (26 Jul 2023 00:13 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Alex Goodwin (26 Jul 2023 05:27 UTC)
Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Jeffrey Schwartz (26 Jul 2023 16:02 UTC)

Re: [TML] The Unbelievability of Virus [long essay] Alex Goodwin 05 Jul 2023 09:43 UTC

Initial response while cooking dinner:

On 5/7/23 07:48, Jeff Zeitlin - editor at freelancetraveller.com (via
tml list) wrote:
> <snip>
>
> Virus, however, doesn't rely on any of that. Virus is, essentially, an
> extension of the idea of the current conception of a computer virus. BUT...

Bruce Schneier, among others, has described the current cyberspace as
offense dominant - incentives are (mis)aligned such that it's much
easier to attack than defend.

I suspect at the interstellar level, given all that computerised safety
of flight/life gubbins, defense will dominate. Be cautious of directly
analogising contemporary dirtside to even C22, let alone C57/C58.

IWAR will still be a thing alongside EWAR and dakka, but not a simple
"Click Here To Kill _Everybody_" setup that we have now.

>
> The vast majority of attacks that "mess up" 'the internet' are what are
> called "denial of service" (DoS) attacks. These attacks, fundamentally,
> attack not the computers themselves, but the communications links between
> them, overloading the channels with bad data to such an extent that
> legitimate traffic can't get through. A somewhat strained analogy might be
> when a mass protest bike ride moves onto major thoroughfares and causes
> traffic tie-ups that reverberate through the system - the bikes are the
> illegitimate traffic, the cars that are jammed up are the legitimate
> traffic, and the protest is the "denial of service" attack - the legitimate
> users of the roads are denied the services thereof. These don't rely on any
> specific characteristic of the target's hardware or software other than its
> capacity to receive and respond to requests.
>
> Most of the attacks that _aren't_ communications-based DoS attacks are of
> two types: data destruction/"hostage taking", or data misappropriation.

One area that has been growing in importance over the last 25 years are
attacks on computerised industrial control systems. Things going wrong
here can result in _corpses_ and _craters_, whether by malice or accident.

I refer the list to the "ThreatGEN: Red Vs Blue" game (available on
Steam) for a solid introduction to the topic.

And remember - modern cars are essentially ICSes on wheels.

IIRC Australia is a world leader in copping it here, with the 1999
Maroochydore water treatment attack.

>
<snip>