Chinese Cyber Attacks and Unrestricted Warfare February 1, 2024
Posted by Chris Mark in Uncategorized.Tags: ai, artificial-intelligence, asymmetric threats., china, Chris Mark, cyber war, cybersecurity, technology, unlimited warfare, War
add a comment
I first wrote about this phenomenon in 2012. It is becoming reality. The recent cyber-attacks attributed to the Chinese government on American infrastructure can be analyzed within the conceptual framework of “unrestricted warfare,” a doctrine developed by two PLA Colonels, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, in response to the perceived military superiority of the United States. This doctrine signifies a strategic shift from traditional, kinetic warfare to a multifaceted approach incorporating a broad spectrum of tactics including economic, political, and PR maneuvers to conduct ‘sub wars’ and ‘pseudo wars’.
At the core of unrestricted warfare is the recognition that the principles of war have evolved. As the authors state, “If we acknowledge that the new principles of war are no longer ‘using armed force to compel the enemy to submit to one’s will,’ but rather are ‘using all means including armed force and non-armed force, military and non-military, lethal and non-lethal means to compel the enemy to accept one’s interests’”[1]. This perspective broadens the scope of warfare to encompass non-traditional methods such as economic manipulation, cyber-attacks, and disinformation campaigns, transcending the conventional battlefield.
The Chinese cyber-attacks on the U.S. infrastructure, as reported in the aforementioned sources, align with this doctrine. These attacks represent a strategic choice to exploit vulnerabilities in critical systems to cause disruption and potential societal panic, without resorting to open military confrontation. This approach fits into the broader pattern of asymmetric threats.
Asymmetric threats, characterized by a disparity in the means and methods between different adversaries, are further defined by three criteria: the involvement of a tactic that one adversary could and would use against another, the unique ability or willingness of the adversary to use such means, and the potential for serious consequences if these means are not countered. In the cybersecurity realm, these threats take on a significant role. A minor actor with basic hacking tools can compel major entities to invest heavily in defense, illustrating the asymmetry in resources and efforts between attackers and defenders.
The Chinese strategy, as evidenced by the cyber-attacks, meets these criteria of asymmetric warfare. It involves tactics that the Chinese government is capable and willing to employ, which the U.S. would not mirror. The potential consequences of these attacks are severe, necessitating significant defensive measures.
Further aligning with the principles of unrestricted warfare, the authors note that unconventional methods can be formidable weapons in modern conflict. They observe, “As we see it, a single man-made stock-market crash, a single computer virus invasion, or a single rumor or scandal that results in a fluctuation in the enemy country’s exchange rates or exposes the leaders of an enemy country on the Internet, all can be included in the ranks of new-concept weapons”[2]. This recognition of non-traditional tactics as weapons underscores the expanded battlefield that now includes economic, political, and technological realms.
In conclusion, the Chinese cyber-attacks on U.S. infrastructure, as part of their broader strategic approach, are indicative of the principles of unrestricted warfare. They represent a calculated move to use asymmetric tactics to undermine U.S. strengths and exploit vulnerabilities, extending the battlefield into the cyber realm. This strategy exemplifies a modern approach to warfare, where the lines between military and non-military means are blurred, and the battleground extends into multiple domains.
Loading the Elevenlabs Text to Speech AudioNative Player…
References:
- Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, “Unrestricted Warfare.”
- Ibid.
Quantifying CyberRisks- Solving the Riddle (per AT&T CyberSecurity Blog) March 11, 2021
Posted by Chris Mark in Uncategorized.Tags: AT&T, Bayes, Chris Mark, cybersecurity, data breach, hacker, risk
add a comment
I recently published a new article on the AT&T CyberSecurity blog titled Quantifying CyberRisks- Solving the Riddle. Below is an excerpt. Click ‘read more’ to read the entire piece.
In the late 1990’s and early 2000’s there was a concept that was bandied about that was coined “Return on Security Investment” or ROSI. Borrowing from the common business term Return on Investment (ROI) where a return on a particular investment (capital investment, personnel, training etc.) could be quantified, the cybersecurity industry attempted to quantify a return on security investment.
Fundamentally, the primary failing of this concept is that it is mathematically impossible (approaches mathematical impossibility) to quantify an event “not occurring”. In short, if a company has “zero” security events that impact them deleteriously in a given year, was the $5 million security expenditure appropriate? Should it have been less since there was no security event that caused a loss? If the company experienced an event, was the return on the investment then the difference between the expenditure and the overall losses from the incident? It simply did not work, as it was mathematically flawed.
Fast forward to 2021 and companies once again are fixated on quantifying cyber risk and, more importantly, cybersecurity exposure. The question is similar and is asked: “Can companies accurately quantify cybersecurity risks today?”
This is a complex question but to attempt an answer it is first important to have a working definition of several terms.
Risk- is an artificial construct which can be easily expressed as the function of the likelihood of an adverse event occurring (often provided as a statistical probability) and the impact, should the event be realized (in business, and for the purposes of this article, it will be expressed in monetary terms.). In short R=fPI. Click Here to Read More!
Holiday Shopping Safety! Debit or Credit? PIN or Pen? Check or Cash? November 18, 2020
Posted by Chris Mark in InfoSec & Privacy, Risk & Risk Management.Tags: Chris Mark, credit or debit, durban amendment, mark consulting group, PCI DSS, PIN
1 comment so far
With the holidays around the corner, it is a hot time for criminals to steal from us all! CyberCriminals are specifically after your money and cards. There is ongoing confusion about whether cards are better than checks are better than cash. While we all have our own opinions, I think the argument is pretty clear that payment cards are the most secure options for consumers. Read below!
For some background, I am a payment card security professional. I have worked at both MasterCard and with Visa, as well as the other card brands. I now work at a major telco overseeing the payment security program. 2020 marks the 15th consecutive year someone has stolen my card at least once (17 times in 15 years) BUT…I wasn’t worried…read below to find out why! (more…)
Covid19: “The War God’s Face Has Become Indistinct” – China’s Unlimited Warfare Strategy April 14, 2020
Posted by Chris Mark in cybersecurity, Risk & Risk Management, terrorism.Tags: china, Chris Mark, coronavirus, covid19, cyber espionage, Foxnews, PLA, Unrestricted Warfare, War, Warfare, Wuhan
add a comment
UPDATE- Today (April 15, 2020) Fox News published an article supporting what has been proposed in this post. Titled“Sources believe coronavirus originated in Wuhan lab as part of China’s efforts to compete with US the article lays out compelling evidence that China was attempting demonstrate that China’s “…efforts to identify and combat viruses are equal too or greater than capabilities of the United States.” The article states that evidence comes from classified, and open source sources and documents. It further states that:
“…(China) blaming the wet market was an effort by China to deflect blame from the laboratory, along with China’s propaganda efforts targetting the US and Italy.”
For those who have not read Unrestricted Warfare referenced in this post, I would strongly suggest you consider reading. The Fox News article is directly in line with China’s 1999 strategy of unlimited warfare against the US and European countries.
In 2013, I wrote an article for The Counter Terrorist Magazine that identified the Chinese strategy of CyberWarfare. You can read the article here.
This followed a seperate article I wrote for the same magazine called “CyberEspionage” that identified China’s efforts to infiltrate the US. Both identify the Chinese focus on unlimited warfare discussed below.
Today, while reading the news, I came across an article that stated that stated that the US State Department cables (read CIA and Intelligence) has stated that the Covid19 Virus may have originated the Wuhan Viral Lab (WVL) who were testing the Coronavirus in bats. According to the Washington Post:“
“As many have pointed out, there is no evidence that the virus now plaguing the world was engineered; scientists largely agree it came from animals. But that is not the same as saying it didn’t come from the lab, which spent years testing bat coronaviruses in animals, said Xiao Qiang, a research scientist at the School of Information at the University of California at Berkeley.”
No “Evidence” is distinctly different than “They did not do it”. Keep in mind that in February, 2020, the US Government charged 4 Chinese Military members with the 2017 Equifax breach.
The question should be: “why would the Chinese launch viruses (if they did) and why would they hack US companies?” The answer is actually pretty straightforward. If you read the article from 2012, you will get much more information than in this blog post.
In 1990 the US engaged the Iraqi military in the Gulf War. The Russians (then Soviets) 
and Chinese watched closely as the US went literally “toe to toe” with the World’s 5th largest standing Army (Iraqi). 96 hours later, the Iraqi Army was soundly defeated. In particular was the Battle of Medina Ridge (also called the Battle of 73 Easting) fought on Feb 27, 1991. It was an absolute route. This convinced the Chinese that a “linear/kinetic war” with the US was unwinnable.
For this reason they embarked upon a new policy called “Unlimited/Unrestricted warfare”.
This is documented in the book called Unrestricted Warfare. In first reading the document, I was shocked at what it contained. In 1999, two Chinese Peoples’ Liberation Army (PLA) Colonels were tasked to write a document titled: Unrestricted Warfare that outlines China’s approach to war with the West. In short, the document articulates a new definition of warfare that includes using all economic, political, and PR means to fight ‘sub wars’ and ‘pseudo wars’.
While we sit in the US laboring under our definition of warfare, our adversaries are redefining the battlespace. Here are some quotes from the document:
“If we acknowledge that the new principles of war are no longer “using armed force to compel the enemy to submit to one’s will,” but rather are “using all means including armed force and non-armed force, military and non-military, lethal and non-lethal means to compel the enemy to accept one’s interests.”[i]
“As we see it, a single man-made stock-market crash, a single computer virus invasion, or a single rumor or scandal that results in a fluctuation in the enemy country’s exchange rates or exposes the leaders of an enemy country on the Internet, all can be included in the ranks of new-concept weapons.”[i]
In short, the Chinese manipulating currency, or the press or even paying a Harvard Professor to be an agent can arguably be considered a ‘pseudo war’ consistent with their strategy of unlimited warfare. As more information becomes available, I would not be surprised to see that this is much more than an “accident” in a lab in Wuhan. Look at the financial toll it has taken on the World and positions the Chinese to be much larger players.
[i] House of Representatives. (Kindle Locations 325-327). Kindle Edition.
[i] Wiangsui Qiao Liang and Wang. Unrestricted warfare. Beijing: PLA Literature and Arts Publishing House; 1999.
How to publish your first Article in a Magazine! April 5, 2020
Posted by Chris Mark in Uncategorized.Tags: articles, Chris Mark, counter terrorism, data breach, national review, publishing, security, sniper
add a comment
As we are all spending time at home, I thought I would publish a quick video on how to write and publish an article. I have published scores of articles and frequently get asked how to identify a topic, research, write and then publish an article. This is about a 40 minute discussion of what has been successful for me! I hope you enjoy! Would love any feedback anyone has!! Here is where you can download the actual preso with narration. Easier to watch. https://globalriskinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/publishing-your-first-article.ppsx
