Guy-Philippe Goldstein: How cyberattacks threaten real-world peace

Translator: Elisabeth Buffard Reviewer: Veronica Martinez Starnes

Prevoditelj: Senzos Osijek Recezent: Tilen Pigac - EFZG

Good afternoon.

Dobar dan.

If you have followed

Ako ste pratili

diplomatic news in the past weeks,

diplomatske vijesti zadnjih tjedana,

you may have heard of a kind of crisis

možda ste čuli za jednu vrstu krize

between China and the U.S.

između Kine i SAD-a

regarding cyberattacks

koja se odnosi na virtualne napade

against the American company Google.

na američku tvrtku Google.

Many things have been said about this.

Mnogo je stvari rečeno o ovome.

Some people have called a cyberwar

Neki su nazvali virtualnim ratom

what may actually be

ono što zapravo može biti

just a spy operation --

samo špijunska operacija --

and obviously, a quite mishandled one.

i to očito, krivo vođena.

However, this episode reveals

Međutim, ovaj slučaj pokazuje

the growing anxiety in the Western world

rastuću anksioznost u Zapadnom svijetu

regarding these emerging cyber weapons.

glede nastajućeg virtualnog oružja.

It so happens that these weapons are dangerous.

Čini se da je ovo oružje opasno.

They're of a new nature:

Nove je prirode

they could lead the world

i moglo bi odvesti svijet

into a digital conflict

u virtualni sukob

that could turn into an armed struggle.

koji bi mogao prerasti u oružanu borbu.

These virtual weapons can also destroy the physical world.

Ovo virtualno oružje također može uništiti i fizički svijet.

In 1982, in the middle of the Cold War

1982. godine usred hladnog rata

in Soviet Siberia,

u Sovjetskom Sibiru

a pipeline exploded with a burst of 3 kilotons,

cijev je eksplodirala praskom od tri kilotona,

the equivalent of a fourth of the Hiroshima bomb.

što je jednako četvrtini praska bombe bačene na Hiroshimu.

Now we know today -- this was revealed

Danas znamo -- to je otkrio

by Thomas Reed,

Thomas Reed,

Ronald Reagan's former U.S. Air Force Secretary --

bivši tajnik zračnih snaga SAD-a Ronalda Reagana --

this explosion was actually the result

da je ta eksplozija zapravo rezultat

of a CIA sabotage operation,

CIA-ine sabotažne operacije,

in which they had managed

u kojoj su se uspijeli

to infiltrate the IT management systems

ubaciti u sustav upravljanja

of that pipeline.

tog cijevovoda.

More recently, the U.S. government revealed

Nedavno je vlada SAD-a otkrila

that in September 2008, more than 3 million people

da je u rujnu 2008., više od tri milijuna ljudi

in the state of Espirito Santo in Brazil

u državi Espirito Santo u Brazilu

were plunged into darkness,

progutao mrak

victims of a blackmail operation from cyber pirates.

kao žrtve ucjene virtualnih pirata.

Even more worrying for the Americans,

Ono što još više zabrinjava Amerikance

in December 2008 the holiest of holies,

jest da je u prosincu 2008., najsvetiji od svetih,

the IT systems of CENTCOM,

sustav upravljanja CENTCOM-om,

the central command

središnji voditelj naredba

managing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,

za rat u Iraku i Afganistanu

may have been infiltrated by hackers

je možda bio infiltriran hakerima

who used these:

koji su koristili sljedeće:

plain but infected USB keys.

obični, ali zaraženi USB.

And with these keys, they may have been able

I s tim USB-om su možda uspjeli

to get inside CENTCOM's systems,

ući u CENTCOM-ove sisteme,

to see and hear everything,

vidjeti i čuti sve,

and maybe even infect some of them.

i možda i zaraziti poneki.

As a result, the Americans take the threat very seriously.

Kao rezultat, Amerikanci shvaćaju ovu prijetnju jako ozibljno.

I'll quote General James Cartwright,

Citirat ću generala Jamesa Cartwrighta,

Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,

potpredsjenika združenog stožera američke vojske,

who says in a report to Congress

koji u izvješću Kongresu

that cyberattacks could be as powerful as

kaže da bi virtualni napadi mogli biti moćni

weapons of mass destruction.

koliko i oružje za masovno uništenje.

Moreover, the Americans have decided

Štoviše, Amerikanci su odlučili

to spend over 30 billion dollars

potrošiti preko 30 milijardi dolara

in the next five years

u sljedećih pet godina

to build up their cyberwar capabilities.

da izgrade svoje kapacitete za virtualni rat.

And across the world today, we see

I diljem svijeta danas, vidimo

a sort of cyber arms race,

neku vrstu utrke u virtualnom naoružanju,

with cyberwar units

s postrojenjima za virtualni rat

built up by countries like North Korea

izgrađenima u zemljama kao što su Sjeverna Koreja

or even Iran.

ili čak Iran.

Yet, what you'll never hear

Ipak, ono što nikada nećete čuti

from spokespeople

od glasnogovornika

from the Pentagon or the French Department of Defence

Pentagona ili francuskog Ministarstva obrane,

is that the question isn't really

jest da pitanje nije

who's the enemy, but actually

tko je neprijatelj, nego

the very nature of cyber weapons.

priroda virtualnog oružja.

And to understand why, we must look at how,

Da bi razumijeli zašto, moramo pogledati kako su

through the ages, military technologies

tijekom vremena vojne tehnologije

have maintained or destroyed

održavale ili uništavale

world peace.

svjetski mir.

For example,

Na primjer,

if we'd had TEDxParis

da smo imali TEDxParis

350 years ago,

prije 350 godina,

we would have talked about the military innovation of the day --

pričali bismo o tadašnjim novostima u oružju --

the massive Vauban-style fortifications --

masivne utvrde u Vauban stilu --

and we could have predicted

i mogli bismo predvidjeti

a period of stability in the world or in Europe.

razdoblje stabilnosti u svijetu ili u Europi,

which was indeed the case in Europe

što je stvarno i bilo u Europi

between 1650 and 1750.

između 1650-te i 1750-te.

Similarly, if we'd had this talk

Slično, da smo imali ovaj razgovor

30 or 40 years ago, we would have seen

prije 30 ili 40 godina, mogli bismo vidjeti

how the rise of nuclear weapons,

kako uspon nuklearnog oružja

and the threat of mutually assured destruction they imply,

i opasnost od uzajamno sigurnog uništenja koje to oružje podrazumijeva,

prevents a direct fight between the two superpowers.

spriječava izravan sukob između dvije supersile.

However, if we'd had this talk 60 years ago,

Međutim, da smo imali ovaj govor prije 60 godina,

we would have seen how the emergence

mogli bismo vidjeli kako pojava

of new aircraft and tank technologies,

novih zrakoplova i tenkovskih tehnologija

which give the advantage to the attacker,

koje daju prednost napadaču

make the Blitzkrieg doctrine very credible

čine Blitzkrieg doktrinu vrlo uvjerljivom

and thus create the possibility of war in Europe.

i tako tvore mogućnost rata u Europi.

So military technologies

Dakle vojne tehnologije

can influence the course of the world,

mogu utjecati na smjer svijeta,

can make or break world peace --

mogu stvoriti ili razbiti svijetski mir --

and there lies the issue with cyber weapons.

i tu leži problem virtualnog oružja.

The first issue:

Prvi problem:

Imagine a potential enemy announcing

Zamislite potencijalnog neprijatelja koji najavljuje

they're building a cyberwar unit,

da gradi postrojenje za virtualni rat,

but only for their country's defense.

ali samo za obranu svoje zemlje.

Okay, but what distinguishes it

Dobro, ali što ju razlikuje

from an offensive unit?

od postrojenja za napad?

It gets even more complicated

Postaje još kompliciranije

when the doctrines of use become ambiguous.

kada princip korištenja postane nejasan.

Just 3 years ago, both the U.S. and France

Prije samo tri godine SAD i Francuska

were saying they were investing militarily in cyberspace,

su govorile da ulažu naoružanje u virtualni prostor,

strictly to defend their IT systems.

izričito da bi obranili svoje sustave upravljanja -- IT sisteme.

But today both countries say

Ali danas obje države govore

the best defense is to attack.

da je napad najbolja obrana.

And so, they're joining China,

I tako se pridružuju Kini,

whose doctrine of use for 15 years has been

čiji je princip djelovanja tijekom 15 godina bio

both defensive and offensive.

i defenzivan i ofenzivan.

The second issue:

Drugi problem:

Your country could be under cyberattack

Vaša zemlja bi mogla biti pod virtualnim napadom

with entire regions plunged into total darkness,

i s cijelim regijama nestati u tami,

and you may not even know

i možete ni ne znati

who's attacking you.

tko vas napada.

Cyber weapons have this peculiar feature:

Virtualno oružje ima ovu svojstvenu osobitost:

they can be used

može biti upotrijebljeno

without leaving traces.

bez ostavljanja tragova.

This gives a tremendous advantage to the attacker,

Ovo daje ogromnu prednost napadaču

because the defender

jer branitelj

doesn't know who to fight back against.

ne zna protiv koga se bori.

And if the defender retaliates against the wrong adversary,

I ako se branitelj osveti pogrešnom napadaču,

they risk making one more enemy

riskira da si stvori još jednog neprijatelja

and ending up diplomatically isolated.

i ostane diplomatski izoliran.

This issue isn't just theoretical.

Ovaj primjer nije samo teoretski.

In May 2007, Estonia was the victim of cyberattacks,

U svibnju 2007., Estonija je bila žrtva virtualnog napada

that damaged its communication

koji je oštetio njene komunikacije

and banking systems.

i bankarske sisteme.

Estonia accused Russia.

Estonija je optužila Rusiju.

But NATO, though it defends Estonia,

Ali NATO, iako brani Estoniju,

reacted very prudently. Why?

je reagirao jako promišljeno. Zašto?

Because NATO couldn't be 100% sure

Zato što NATO nije mogao biti 100% siguran

that the Kremlin was indeed behind these attacks.

da je Kremlin stvarno stajao iza tih napada.

So to sum up, on the one hand,

Dakle da skratimo -- u jednu ruku,

when a possible enemy announces

kada mogući neprijatelj objavi

they're building a cyberwar unit,

da gradi postrojenje za virtualni rat,

you don't know whether it's for attack

ne znate je li to za napad

or defense.

ili obranu.

On the other hand,

U drugu ruku,

we know that these weapons give an advantage to attacking.

znamo da ovo oružje daje prednost pri napadu.

In a major article published in 1978,

U velikom članku objavljenom 1978.,

Professor Robert Jervis of Columbia University in New York

profesor Robert Jervis sa sveučilišta Kolumbija u New Yorku

described a model to understand

opisao je model da bi shvatio

how conflicts could arise.

kako bi sukob mogao nastati.

In this context,

U ovom kontekstu,

when you don't know if the potential enemy

kada ne znate priprema li se potencijalni neprijatelj

is preparing for defense or attack,

za obranu ili napad

and if the weapons give an advantage to attacking,

i ako oružje daje prednost pri napadu,

then this environment is

onda je ovo okruženje

most likely to spark a conflict.

vrlo podložno za pojavu sukoba.

This is the environment that's being created

To je okruženje koje danas nastaje

by cyber weapons today,

zbog virtualnog oružja

and historically it was the environment in Europe

i povijesno takvo je okruženje bilo i u Europi

at the onset of World War I.

na početku Prvog svjetkog rata.

So cyber weapons

Dakle virtualno oružje

are dangerous by nature,

je po prirodi opasno,

but in addition, they're emerging

ali u dodatku, pojavljuje se

in a much more unstable environment.

u puno nestabilnijem okruženju.

If you remember the Cold War,

Ako se sjećate Hladnog rata,

it was a very hard game,

bila je to vrlo teška igra,

but a stable one played only by two players,

ali stabilna i igrana samo od strane dva igrača,

which allowed for some coordination between the two superpowers.

što je donekle dopustilo koordinaciju između dvije supersile.

Today we're moving to a multipolar world

Danas se selimo u multipolaran svijet

in which coordination is much more complicated,

u kojem je koordinacija puno kompliciranija,

as we have seen at Copenhagen.

kao što smo vidjeli u Kopenhagenu.

And this coordination may become even trickier

I ova koorodinacija može postati još kompliciranija

with the introduction of cyber weapons.

uvodom virtualnog oružja.

Why? Because no nation

Zašto? Zato što nijedna nacija

knows for sure whether its neighbor

nije posve sigurna hoće li je susjed

is about to attack.

napasti.

So nations may live under the threat

Države mogu živjeti pod prijetnjom

of what Nobel Prize winner Thomas Schelling

od, kako je to dobitnik Nobelove nagrade, Thomas Schelling

called the "reciprocal fear of surprise attack,"

nazvao, „obostran strah od iznenadnog napada“:

as I don't know if my neighbor

jer ne znam sprema li se moj susjed

is about to attack me or not --

napasti me ili ne --

I may never know --

možda nikada neću znati --

so I might take the upper hand

pa mogu prvi povući potez

and attack first.

i prvi napasti.

Just last week,

Prošli tjedan,

in a New York Times article dated January 26, 2010,

u članku u New York Timesu objavljenom 26. siječnja 2010.

it was revealed for the first time that

po prvi put je otkriveno

officials at the National Security Agency

da su službenici u Nacionalnoj agenciji za sigurnost

were considering the possibility of preemptive attacks

razmatrali mogućnost preventivnih napada

in cases where the U.S. was about

u slučaju da će SAD biti

to be cyberattacked.

virtualno napadnut.

And these preemptive attacks

I ti preventivni napadi

might not just remain

možda ne ostanu

in cyberspace.

samo u virtualnom prostoru.

In May 2009, General Kevin Chilton,

U svibnju 2009., general Kevin Chilton,

commander of the U.S. nuclear forces,

zapovjednik američkih nuklearnih snaga

stated that in the event of cyberattacks against the U.S.,

naveo je da će u slučaju virtualnog napada protiv SAD-a,

all options would be on the table.

sve opcije biti otvorene.

Cyber weapons do not replace

Virtualno oružje ne zamjenjuje

conventional or nuclear weapons --

konvencionalno ili nuklearno oružje --

they just add a new layer to the existing system of terror.

samo dodaje novi sloj postojećem sustavu terora.

But in doing so, they also add their own risk

Ali pri tome također dodaje vlastiti rizik

of triggering a conflict --

poticanja sukoba --

as we've just seen, a very important risk --

kao što smo upravo vidjeli, vrlo važan rizik --

and a risk we may have to confront

i rizik s kojim ćemo se morati suočiti

with a collective security solution

s kolektivnim sigurnosnim rješenjem

which includes all of us:

koje uključuje sve nas:

European allies, NATO members,

europske saveznike, članove NATO-a,

our American friends and allies,

američke prijatelje i saveznike,

our other Western allies,

druge zapadne saveznike

and maybe, by forcing their hand a little,

i možda, primorajući ih malo,

our Russian and Chinese partners.

naše ruske i kineske partnere.

The information technologies

Informacijske tehnologije

Joël de Rosnay was talking about,

o kojima je Joël De Rosnay pričao,

which were historically born from military research,

koje su povijesno stvorene iz vojnih istraživanja

are today on the verge of developing

danas su na granici razvitka

an offensive capability of destruction,

napadačkih kapaciteta uništenja,

which could tomorrow, if we're not careful,

koji bi sutra mogli, ako ne budemo pazili,

completely destroy world peace.

potpuno uništiti svjetski mir.

Thank you.

Hvala Vam.

(Applause)

( Pljesak)