dialectics of cyber international relations and cyber defense: towards a strategic research program...

Dialectics of Cyber International Relations and Cyber Defense:

Towards a Strategic Research Program

John C. Mallery ([email protected])Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence Laboratory

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Explorations in Cyber International Relations (ECIR)

Explorations in Cyber International Relations OSD Minerva Research Project at Harvard & MIT

Presentation at the ECIR Workshop on Cyber International Relations: Emergent Realities of Conflict and Cooperation, MIT, Cambridge, October 14, 2010.

mailto:[email protected]

Explorations in Cyber International Relations OSD Minerva Research Project at Harvard & MIT2

Overview Activities Under ECIR Strategic IR Research Program Cyber Defense Strategy Meta-power As IR Leverage Criteria High-leverage Research Areas Dialectics Computational Politics Selected Leverage Vignettes


Activities Under ECIR Stanley Cyber Monitoring & Analysis System

5 document streams Over 4k documents

Cross-organization Cyber Data Study 5 themes: international interactions, crime,

economics, defensive coordination, long-term transformations

Recommendations for cyber data collection Over a dozen organizations

Cyber Defense Strategy Work factor concept Technology strategy

Today: Linking IR to Cyber Defense


Strategic Research Program

How can we prioritize research on cyber international relations to focus on the highest leverage problems? Exhaustive enumeration is slow Recycling pre-existing disciplinary concepts

may lack relevance or leverage Approach

Link to cyber defense strategy Identify cyber fueled processes that drive

strategy-relevant reallocations power, wealth, knowledge, cultural attractiveness, welfare

Elucidate those processes


What is cyberspace? Interdependent network of information

technology infrastructures (NSPD54/HSPD23) Internet Telecommunications networks Computer systems Embedded processors Controllers in critical industries

Virtual environment of information and interactions between people (NSPD54/HSPD23)

US Military: Electro-magnetic spectrum Information operations C4ISR, space

Supply chains for IT Computers, networks, software, crypto, id mgt., etc.


Big Elephant: High Cognitive Difficulty

Due Vast Cross-Cuts

Cyber insecurity has manifestations across the range of human activities where there is value Business Defense Society

Technological basis of crisis is difficult to apprehend Current COTs failures 40 years of traditional computer security Future: transformational computing & networking

Policy and legal responses are difficult Cyber spans most traditional policy domains Received legal concepts and categories are blurred Best organizational modes unclear

Responses often reflect disjointed incrementalism Analytical reductions based on received disciplinary lenses

(analogies) Proposed solutions based on repurposed concepts

Creation of integrative frameworks) is essential Enables cumulation across disciplines and knowledge areas


DoD Cyber Strategy William J. Lynn, Deputy Secretary, DoD

Foreign Affairs, August, 2010 NATO, September, 15 CFR, September 30

Vast vulnerabilities & critical reliance Military/Intel Critical infrastructure Private sector

Five pillars1 Domain of warfare2 Active & timely defense3 Protection of critical infrastructure4 Collective defense with allies5 Technological leverage


Strategic Approach

Vision Trustworthy systems and resilient society Articulation of roles and responsibilities Alignment of guiding images

Integrative Framework Effective application of resources Coordinated division of labor Common language Dynamic refinement

Objectives Prioritized Risk adjusted Time horizons

Implementing strategies High leverage Synergistic moves

Transform US cyber-infrastructures to: Resist attacks and continue to function under adversity Enhance confidence in computation and communications Enable rapid adoption of new technological advances Strength competiveness via improved agility, effectiveness, and learning


Defensive Complexity Analysis

Response to cyber asymmetries requires high leverage solutions Application to the entire attack value cycle (financial, political-military) Time frames: Short-term (0-2 yrs), medium-term (2-5 yrs), long-term (5-10 yrs)

Security meta-metrics focus on difficulty of attacker or defender tasks Work factor (WF) is the difficulty of executing tasks Analogous to computational difficulty in cryptography Extends beyond the technical designs to domain embeddings (cyber operations

research) Dimensions of work factors

Resources Computational complexity (mathematical leverage) Cost (often related to complexity) Expertise and Knowledge (technical specialties, domain knowledge)

Planning, execution and information management Cognitive difficulty (model as formulation of non-linear plans and counter plans) Learning difficulty (reversing obfuscation, devising new tactics or approaches) Organizational effectiveness/dysfunction (integration, learning, structure,

psychology) Risk

Uncertainty (confidence, incomplete information) Culture (risk acceptance or aversion) Information differential gain/loss (innovation, leakage by insider, espionage,

diffusion) Make technical or policy moves that cumulatively

Impose hard problems on attackers (prefer geometric impact) Facilitate coordinated defense (eliminate multipliers)


Defensive Strategy Decomposition:Planes of Action

Leadership organization Policy community Technology visionaries Domain architects

Cyber technology base IT capital goods industry Telecommunications

operators Identity management &

crypto sectors Standards bodies and

certification/accreditation authorities

Public sector domains Military & intelligence

systems Government systems Defense industrial base

Private sector domains Critical infrastructure Research and education

infrastructure Supply chain Major enterprise Smaller enterprise Consumer

International cooperation Allies Trading partners Regional or issue groups Global

International competition Mutual understandings Declaratory policies Norms


Solutions vs. Mitigations

Solution Domains (10-30 years) Science, technology, engineering R&D infrastructure Human capital IT capital goods industrial organization Critical infrastructures

Threat mitigation domains Information assurance management International cyber crime law enforcement Cooperative engagement (like minded) International norms (agreements 10+ yrs) Deterrence (cross domain responses)


Meta-power (BBB) As Leverage Framework

Power: Set of action possibilities and payoffs for actors within an interaction framework

Meta-power: Action possibilities that change the distribution of power resources among actors (Deutsch: Nth order power)

Strategic Competition: Contention over meta-power resources

Leverage: Impact of cyber-fueled international processes on national strategies


High-leverage Research Areas

Information Diffusion Economic strategy based on knowledge activities becomes

problematic Globalization

National location of key industries (and spread effects) more difficult Cyber-enabled organizational learning => higher adaptive

capacities Race for more effective organizations as a basis for national

advantage Computational support for cyber decision-making and

understanding Modeling, mechanism design, precedent reasoning, game theory,

grammars of action Cultural interpenetration

Global digital ecumene -> clash of civilizations or transcendence? Empowerment of small groups

Ability of “terrorists” to organize and cause trouble


Dialectics Information assurance is slippery with

many potentially self-defeating moves Centralization -> aggregation of threat Standardization -> low diversity -> scale

economies of attack Conservation of threat -> attacks move to

weaker surfaces

Two definitions of dialectics: Process and complement process Action and reaction


Examples of Cyber Dialectics

Ready access to S&T knowledge Faster research cycle within countries Unprecedented rates of global knowledge diffusion

Empowers global business operations (e.g., IT sector) More efficient resource utilization More conflict over loci of production

Virtual concentration of dispersed groups Critical mass to articulate knowledge interests Critical mass to organize insurgencies or nihilistic actions

Informationalized militaries (e.g., GIG) Global power projection (Gulf War 1 forward) Asymmetric power projection (cyber war)

More effective bureaucracy Improved domestic operations, law enforcement, transparency Reduced autonomy of the state (via network

interpenetration, higher scrutiny)


Computational Theories of Politics and IR

Karl Deutsch Political cybernetics and systems dynamics Integration theory

Hayward Alker Mathematical politics (limits – degrees of freedom, structural

change) Systems dynamics (limits – structural transformation) Generative grammars (limits – descriptive) AI and text-interpretive theories of IR (learning, meaning) Dialectics of world order

Herbert Simon AI and political science (search paradigm) Computational search in organizations (“bounded rationality”)

Lloyd Etheredge Government learning (1985) (psychology and structure)

John Mallery Computational politics (1988) Application of computational models of cognition to IR


CyberSocial Systems Networking and computation spread

ubiquitously 1992-2010 Cyberphysical systems

Now: Computers provide cognitive prosthetics Networks link human-computer cognitive systems

Speed -> gain in systems Faster rates of interaction Global immediacy Co-evolution and interpenetration of cyber systems

and biological cognition Computational analytical frameworks needed

Individual => social network => organization


Digital Noosphere (Tailard Desjardins)

Collective knowledge of humanity Under active assembly on the Web today

Culture becomes digital Expectation of increasing cultural gain

Organizational adaptation requires increased rates of learning Faster interactions (digital diplomacy) More information marshaled Better knowledge: Conflict vs. homogenization

Major challenge of modernity Networked global ecumene Opportunities for broader international integration Clash of cultures: West, Islam, South Asia, East

Asia


Globalization (World System Analysis)

Reinforces and extends ability of transnational firms to coordinate global production Increases centripal impact on loci of production Reduces state sovereignty, but some states can

influence firms’ locational calculi (e.g., China) New Neo-mercantilism (world order threat)

Competition for future industries Lock-in of raw materials and new markets (e.g.,

Africa) “Currency wars”

Refocus on developmental economics “Conditioned development” (Cardoso) “Spread effects” (Myrdal), “staple theory” (Innis) Industrial policy helps understand emerging powers Necessary strategy for national economic renewal


Strategic Research Program

How can we prioritize research on cyber international relations to focus on the highest leverage problems? Exhaustive enumeration is slow Recycling pre-existing disciplinary concepts

may lack relevance or leverage Approach

Link to cyber defense strategy Identify cyber fueled processes that drive

strategy-relevant reallocations power, wealth, knowledge, cultural attractiveness, welfare

Elucidate those processes

dialectics of cyber international relations and cyber defense: towards a strategic research program...

Documents