Ghost Fleet #5½: Why post now?

 Well, Foreign Policy just reminded me that people in the Pentagon are taking this book very, very seriously.

Sigh.

Comments

[McDevite]

Isn't that wonderful?

[Dave K.]

This is not necessarily bad. The sensationalism gets through to the General Officer / SES level. They push resources to pre-existing programs and initiatives. The leadership's unrealistic prior views are replaced by equally unrealistic but more useful views.

A more serious book would have focus on the impact of compromised operational information along with a myriad of attacks on commercial/contractor systems the military depends on. That would have been much less sexy and had much less influence on senior leaders.

[Noel Maurer]

I don't understand why the views gleaned from Ghost Fleet are useful.

[Dave K.]

GOs who weren't Signal Officers were likely to put extremely low value on Cyber Electro-Magnetic Activities given when they were Commanders of BNs and BCTs. The 6 tends to be less help in educating GOs than you might assume. Even inaccurate books that get your GOs to care about cyber can be an improvement.

Ideally exercises, experiments, lessons learned and sometimes even a book like this will contribute to GOs standing up Cyber Key Terrain and Vulnerability Task Forces for their Commands. Those Task Forces can uncover critical neglected vulnerabilities (often outside the DODIN) and deploy tools for improved Cyber Situational Awareness.

[mickle joan]

Ghost Fleet is a page-turning imagining of a war set in the not-too-distant future. Navy captains battle through a modern-day Pearl Harbor; fighter pilots duel with stealthy drones; teenage hackers fight in digital playgrounds;

[Noel Maurer]

Is this spam? I mean, it is; this one just has the damndest programming. It clearly latched onto the phrase "Ghost Fleet" and reproduced the blurb. Interesting.

[remo]

Noel Maurer is the spammer with no content in his blog! really waste of time!

[Noel Maurer]

Fascinating.