We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Combating cybercrime a focus at G7 and Biden-Putin summits
Marietje Schaake, International Policy Director at Stanford's Cyber Policy Center, Eurasia Group senior advisor and former MEP, discusses trends in big tech, privacy protection and cyberspace:
Cyber issues took center stage at the G7 summit. Is there a consensus among world leaders on how to handle cyberweapons?
Well, depending on who is included, there is a growing consensus that the escalations of conflict in cyberspace must stop. And G7 leaders that are now all representing democracies did call on Russia to hold perpetrators of cybercrime that operate from within its borders to account. So, I guess hope dies last because laws in Russia prevents the extradition of suspects to the US, even if Vladimir Putin answered positively when Joe Biden asked for cooperation on that front. And when it comes to limiting the spread of tools that are used for hacking, surveillance and infiltration, the EU has just moved ahead and adopted new dual use regulations which reflect the concerns for human rights violations when journalists are targeted the way that Jamal Khashoggi was. So ending the proliferation of systems that are used to attack would be an urgent but also obvious step for democratic nations to agree on.
Will Biden's meeting with Putin influence a united Western approach in combating cybercrime?
Well, after the intense and high-profile series of ransomware attacks, there's a fresh focus on deterrence and accountability in this space. Biden announced several sectors of critical infrastructure should be off limits for cyberattacks. But the need is really for sufficient consequences to force those in Russia, but also elsewhere to stop their lucrative, cynical practices.
Highlights from our live conversation on cybersecurity challenges
Cyber is a tool, and sometimes a weapon. Whether used for commercial gain or for attacks on critical infrastructure, actions taken in cyberspace affect you directly. This means that even the most mundane realities of everyday life are vulnerable to hackers.
In our live May 18 event, "Beyond SolarWinds: Securing Cyberspace," we asked our speakers what we can do to safeguard cyberspace from future attacks.
Ian Bremmer, president of Eurasia Group and GZERO Media, (above) explains "there are three different levels of cooperation we desperately need to reduce a threat that right now is growing exponentially for our national securities at home." At one level, there needs to be greater coordination between the private and public sectors in the US. It needs to be "much deeper, much more structural, much more efficient" than what we currently have, says Bremmer.
This step requires us to acknowledge that cybersecurity is no longer different from physical security. Technology runs every aspect of our lives now, including our physical infrastructure as the Colonial Pipeline hack so evidently proved. So, with increasing cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, cyber defense needs to become more sophisticated. This requires the tech sector to continue to develop stronger security protection while the public and private sectors simultaneously implement cybersecurity practices across the board, says Brad Smith, president of Microsoft.
Microsoft's Brad Smith on the Pervasive Dangers of Ransomware Attacks | Global Stage | GZERO Mediawww.youtube.com
Jane Harman, President Emerita of the Wilson Center and former ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, notes that "the markers have been here for years about the impact of cyber" on US infrastructure. The SolarWinds and Colonial Pipeline hacks are just incidents in a series of cyberattacks that further emphasize how sophisticated hackers are, and how unprepared the US has become.
Harman added that the US specifically bungled its response to the SolarWinds hack because a private firm found out first. That's why Biden's executive order mandating private firms in business with the US government to immediately report such cyberattacks is a good first step, but it needs to be more robust. The private sector as a whole needs to coordinate better with the US government. Executive orders are "not enough" to tackle one of the United States' most difficult problems.
Biden's Executive Orders Are “Not Enough," Says Jane Harman | Global Stage | GZERO Mediawww.youtube.com
Greater coordination between the US and its transatlantic allies is the second level of cooperation we need to reduce the cybersecurity threat. But mistrust, which is both deep and structural, is standing in the way.
"Trust is the currency of diplomacy", according to Wolfgang Ischinger, chairman of the Munich Security Conference. In its absence, the US and its allies have a serious obstacle standing in their way when it comes to issues like global cybersecurity cooperation. "Europeans across the board, don't even trust their own governments" or companies let alone the US government and American companies, says Ischinger. "But the really worrisome thing is that [Europeans] mistrust Americans almost as much, … as they mistrust the Chinese."
Wolfgang Ischinger: "Europeans Don't Even Trust Their Own Governments" | Global Stage | GZERO Mediawww.youtube.com
That is why rebuilding trust across the Atlantic is an important part of the way forward for cybersecurity, says Smith. It may be hard for people, including the United States government, to fully understand the impact the current lack of trust has on cybersecurity. But there needs to be greater transparency between countries that intend to work together to combat growing waves of distrust. Transparency "is central to everything else we need to do together to address the cybersecurity threats we're seeing around the world," says Smith.
Microsoft's Brad Smith on Actions Needed to Build Cyber Trust | Global Stage | GZERO Mediawww.youtube.com
Lastly, we must seek a broader level of global coordination and trust, says Bremmer. "While we all recognize we need that, we are right now heading in the opposite direction."
However, there is some hope on the horizon as we are becoming more away of this crisis. "It is moving up in the league of tables in terms of major policymakers around the world understanding that this is a real threat" we need to address. This leads Bremmer to feel fairly confident in the resources that will be devoted to global cybersecurity cooperation over the next five years.
"Beyond SolarWinds: Securing Cyberspace," a Global Stage live conversation on cyber challenges facing governments, companies, and citizens, was recorded on May 18, 2021. It's presented by GZERO Media and Microsoft, and held in collaboration with the Munich Security Conference as part of their "Road to Munich" series.
Hackers shut down US pipeline
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take:
Hi, everybody. Ian Bremmer here. Happy Monday to you. A Quick Take. I wanted to talk about this unprecedented hack that has shut down a major pipeline in the United States. The Colonial Pipeline carries well over 2 million barrels a day. It's about half of the East Coast supply of gas and jet fuel. In other words, really not something you want to have suspended. And when I think about the impact of cyberattacks in the world, I mean, we've been warning that this is going to be a bigger challenge going forward, we're now really starting to see the implications of it.
In this case, it's a dual attack. It was an attack both against data in the firm that has been stolen that the organization, the criminal syndicate that has perpetrated the attack has said that they will make it public and delete all of the data from the system of the pipeline company if the ransom is not paid by the deadline that they have provided. And then of course, they also physically shut down the pipeline as well. It's an enormous problem. It's probably unprecedented in the scale of impact in the United States, though, we're seeing more of this kind of thing around the world.
So, let's take a step back. What does it mean? How much should we be worried and what can we do when we think about cyber? Well, when I think about the world of cyber over the course of the past 10 years, there are some aspects of it, the great power competition that has worried me less, because even though it's all about offense, the United States, the Chinese, the Russians by far the most capable in terms of offensive cyber capabilities than in other countries, like Israel and Iran with less but significant capabilities. But those governments, large governments do understand that if they are to engage in the kind of escalatory attacks, that could cause real damage to the country that they're going after, then the gloves come off and suddenly this can turn into a real national security danger. It could create a kinetic war that spirals out of control. And so, they don't do it. And so there has been a level of cyber deterrence between major countries all around the world.
You've seen these unprecedented attacks in the last months, for example, the SolarWinds attack that we believe came from Russia and other massive attacks coming from China. But in each of these cases, no critical infrastructure was destroyed or even damaged to the best of our knowledge. No, instead it was espionage. It was surveillance. It was monitoring. By the way, the Americans do the same thing to all of those countries, whether they have offensive cyber capabilities themselves or not. So that's a bit like the nuclear balance. It's all offense. It's not defense, but there are constraints on what countries do, because if you set off one nuke, other nuclear countries are quite likely to retaliate in kind. So it does create a level of stability, even though it is a more dangerous destructive environment in the world. You'd rather not have them than have them. Okay, that's the good side.
The bad side is that you sometimes have governments that engage in acts on cyber that go bigger and larger than had initially been presumed. So for example, when the Russians engaged in the NotPetya attack against Ukraine, which was a piece of malware that was reverse engineered out of the US, out of the National Security Agency developed in the US a few years before, it did hit Ukraine, it absolutely caused major economic damage and political stability damage to the country, but it also escaped. And so in relatively short order, you had Western corporations with operations primarily all over the world, very little in Ukraine. In some cases, just a couple of computers in Ukraine causing billions of dollars of damage because the malware spread. And the Russian government, I find it highly unlikely that they intended for that attack to spread. And the question was, did they either not know or not care? I suspect it's more the former than the latter, because if it got really big, this could have caused an enormous blow back for Russia. But that means that intrinsically when you're engaging in cyberattacks with new forms of weapons that have the ability to spread autonomously, there's greater danger around the nature of attack. That's one point.
Secondly, it's a lot harder to contain cyber offensive capabilities to a small number of countries. Obvious example, I mentioned among countries that have strong cyber capabilities, Iran. Now, we're working in the United States, the Biden Administration is working very hard right now to try to get the United States back into the JCPOA, the Iranian nuclear deal the Trump Administration unilaterally withdrew from. And if that happens, we will continue to successfully prevent the Iranian government from developing nuclear weapons capability with verifiable inspections on the ground. That's important, it's significant, but there has been no ability to limit the nature and development of Iran's offensive cyber capabilities, which they use against Israel, against Saudi Arabia, against the United States. And there's very little capacity to deter a government that is much more unstable itself, that has willingness. And it's the reason we don't want Iran to have nukes is because we think that that potentially could lead to much more conflict in the region. That's unacceptably dangerous to let's say Israel or to the Saudis, other American allies on the ground, but they have those cyber capabilities. And that's clearly a danger. I mean the Operation Shamoon, which the Iranians did, which looks like it was a reverse engineer of the Stuxnet attack that the Americans, the Israelis engaged in against Iranian centrifuges, basically was within a couple of hours of taking all of Saudi Aramco's energy production offline, and that could have precipitated a war.
So you're much closer to trip wires to red lines, even among governments, because of that when you talk about cyber. And then you have what we just saw, what we're experiencing now with the shutdown of the colonial pipeline, and this is a criminal syndicate. Non-state actors, whether they be gangs or the aforementioned 300-pound guy on a bed in New Jersey, or whether it's a terrorist organization, the ability of institutions and people that are much less easily determinable either because of the ideology or because you don't know who they are engaging in strikes that are really dangerous, that is becoming unprecedented in today's environment. And that's what we just saw. The cybercriminal gang called DarkSide is ostensively behind the attack on the Colonial Pipeline.
And this is a cybercriminal gang, right? It is a group of individuals. It is not known who they are. They have anonymity, they're quite sophisticated. And they engage in these strikes against multinational corporations, some small, some big, to enrich themselves essentially. And this organization, DarkSide, has said that they won't attack hospitals, for example. That's their form of ethics. Other such organizations have no such compunction. You've seen a number of hospitals shut down. For example, one of the things I was worried about is what would have happened if there had been a massive cyberattack by a criminal gang against American hospitals at the time when they were getting overwhelmed by the pandemic. This is an absolute, real danger and something that the technology exists to do. And the people that could engage in those attacks have that technology in their hands, right now. And so the only thing stopping them is the sense of ethics that these criminals actually have. That's a serious problem.
Now in the case of DarkSide, and a lot of these criminals are operating in areas where Western rule of law cannot reach them, the presumption with DarkSide is they are in the former Soviet space. And the reason I presume that is because those that are studying DarkSide's attack so far have seen no attacks against Russian and former Soviet countries. Companies that obviously would be just as exposed, in many cases more so than those outside of the former Soviet union. No attacks against Russia, Ukraine, against Kazakhstan, countries like that. So you would expect that the people that are engaged in DarkSide are either from one or many of the former Soviet states. A lot harder to hit them directly when rule of law doesn't reach that far and when the governments themselves are showing absolutely no interest.
In fact, in the case of Russia, many of the cyberattacks the Russian government engages in are essentially outsourced to these criminal gangs that make money both in terms of the national security efforts that they make at behest of the Russian government, but also then sideline, moonlight, have their side gig engaging in criminal activities, outside the former Soviet space.
The likelihood that this significantly worsens US and Western relations with Russia leads to more sanctions. If so, because the Russian government and others are refusing to take action. That's also a real problem. And one that isn't likely to get resolved anytime soon. So serious challenges as a consequence of this. It showed up very high on our top risks for 2021. This is part of the reason for it. And I suspect we're going to spend a lot more time on it going forward.
So, not the cheeriest topic for a Monday kicking off your week, but hopefully something we get resolved at least in this attacks case, in relatively short order. Be safe, everybody. Avoid fewer people and I'll talk to you soon.
- Why the US was unprepared for the 2020 cyber breach - GZERO ... ›
- Impact of Microsoft hack deepens; why cyber attacks target ... ›
- Panel: Working together to protect cyberspace - GZERO Media ›
- Russia's cyber attack: an act of espionage or war? - GZERO Media ›
- DarkSide hack reveals risk of ransomware cyberattacks - GZERO Media ›
- Will there be a decisive US response to Russian cyber attacks? - GZERO Media ›
- Panel: Working together to protect cyberspace - GZERO Media ›
- Russian hackers target US tech companies with little accountability - GZERO Media ›
- Russian hackers target US tech companies with little accountability - GZERO Media ›
- How Russian cyberwarfare could impact Ukraine & NATO response - GZERO Media ›
- How Russian cyberwarfare could impact Ukraine & NATO response - GZERO Media ›