| High tech, espionage, and politics Oh dear, WikiLeaks have just dumped out a pile of documents showing that the CIA is actively developing hacking tools as well as collecting those already available on the dark web. Already I can hear the start of the howls of shock and horror from the direction of the faces and the twits. Do I think they are misplaced then? Yep, definitely. Actually, I’d go further. If the CIA were NOT developing hacking tools, they wouldn’t be doing their job! Look – the CIA are spies. It’s their job to spy on the USA’s enemies, potential enemies, and, not least, its friends. Yes, spying on your friends is an important part of the work of spies. Given that job, it’s obvious that they need to develop high grade hacking tools. After all, the opposition counter intelligence agencies are undoubtedly developing high grade security tools. At the end of the day tools for hacking computers and communications are conceptually no different to the devices built in World War II by the UK to hack the German ‘Enigma’ code, and the USA to hack the Japanese ‘Purple’ code. They are just more sophisticated, because things have moved on. It has been suggested that there is a difference because these tools can be used against ordinary people. That’s very true – but there is nothing new in that – ordinary people’s mail was also clandestinely targeted in World War II. There are various ways of doing it without leaving traces. I remember trying one out as a kid. I smeared cow gum onto one of my mum’s knitting needles and allowed it to dry so the surface was very slightly sticky. Pushing the needle into the top of the envelope and twirling it round wrapped the letter around the needle and I was able to extract the letter. The reverse put the letter back undisturbed. Unfortunately, I forgot to strip off the cow gum afterwards, and my mother issued dire threats about future use after inadvertently trying to use the needle. Thus ended my career as a budding spy... Nowadays we intercept and decrypt (if necessary) electronic mail using hacking tools, but again that’s conceptually the same as my knitting needle. A little more sophisticated, maybe, but essentially the same. And, of course, it’s even easier if you can hack into your opponent’s computer and gather intelligence directly from it. That’s why spies need to develop technology. Of course, anything spies do and use is double edged – the technology is neutral, its use is not. That’s why spy organisations in democracies have legal limits on what they can do. And that’s where the problems and the politics come in. Spies don’t broadcast publicly what they are doing, so you have to set up mechanisms to make sure they are not overstepping the limits – i.e. politics. If you think the spies are stepping out of line, then you need to take the issue up with your political representatives. And one other thing you might like to ponder, while we are on this topic, is that in a conventional war the enemy is very clear and intelligence resources are focused on a clear target. But what happens when you declare war on ‘terrorism’? Terrorists come in all shapes, sizes and colours. Suddenly, and dangerously, -anyone- could be a terrorist, and the stage is set for the spread of spying to a county’s own citizens. ‘War on Terror’. The sound bite is brilliant. The semantics are deadly.
|
If you have any questions or comments about the articles on my web site, click here to send me email. |