Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
techniques to pinpoint the precise target in order to find and eliminate intruders. So the
main target is a developed relationship between forces in different countries.
Valente : I would like to pose two questions, but I would like to start with two
comments. I think it is important that we distinguish between hackers and terrorists.
Hackers are not the same as terrorists and terrorists are not the same as hackers. There
are hackers indeed who are terrorists, but there are hackers who are working on the good
side, so to speak. And there is a difference between white hat hackers and black hat
hackers. I think that the war against black hat hacker terrorists can only be made by
using white hat hackers. And I think that you are correct in saying that Ukraine can use
its very clever people to do that. Regarding the classification of a virus as a weapon of
mass destruction, let us keep in mind that a virus can be useful, that a virus has been used
to do good things, such as fighting other viruses. So we have here an imbalance where
we prohibit the same tools and then we are unable to use those same tools to our
advantage. And now my two questions. The first is this: how would you, Professor,
propose to distinguish between countries with a military political infrastructure and those
with a civilian infrastructure? My second question is: do you think that we are fighting
here, as you very well said, against distributed network organisations in a world-wide
distribution. Do you think that the best way to fight these organisations is through a
hierarchical monolithical infrastructure such as the military and NATO, for example, or
do you think that the only way that we can fight these distributed networks is by creating
a counter distributed decentralised network?
Azarov : Firstly, in order to distinguish between civil infrastructure and no civil
infrastructure is, in my point of view, by law, and only law. And I think that the law that
we see now is not connecting to the situation of any phenomena that we can show. And
that is why it is fair that most developed countries have to put this situation into law.
And I believe other countries should adjust their own national laws in accordance with
the law of developed countries. For instance, digital signature is a good example, and I
think the main aim of our work group is the start of this discussion. But the next step is
to prepare our results to law advisers so that they can turn our results and our decisions
into international law. Otherwise it will be armed conflict.
And on the second question of how we should fight distributed decentralised
organisations, I am as you know, a member of the Council for Science Degrees and when
someone explains this topic, it is really out of my scope. I am a scientist and therefore I
am the enemy of any centralised system. I think that a centralised system is a result of
former times and now we have a metric system, we have independent mobile groups and
as a result, netwar. Independent mobile groups understand it as freedom as everyone
wants to be free. And there are people who want to be understood and want to explain
that they are exclusive people with their own thinking. That is why I think this
centralised system is the result of the yuppie culture. And these results are distributed
around the world. I think that every fundamental religion is a centralised religion; that is
why every fundamental terrorist group is the result of this and that is why that freedom is
a decentralised system and the future result of European culture. And the Ukrainian
example is interesting. Perhaps Ukraine repeats the history of the United States but that
is my point of view. Because we are independent we have many different religions,
many different nationalities and we are very homogeneous. Therefore it is difficult to
answer your question. We have to study all of these questions; what does cyberwar
Search WWH ::




Custom Search