Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

National Cyber-Doctrines: Forthcoming Strategic Shifts

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Cybersecurity in France

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Cybersecurity ((BRIEFSCYBER))

Abstract

This chapter presents a comparison and positioning of several national cyber-doctrines, and an overview of the technological changes that are shaping national policies and national defense systems. In particular, the chapter questions radical changes in technology that are lagging in both comprehension and implementation into cyber-doctrines and national cyber-defense systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Baumard (1994).

  2. 2.

    Bierly et al. (2008), Bourrier (1996), Fry et al. (2010), Kushner (2013), Roschlin and Meyer (1994).

  3. 3.

    Parxson (1999), Sterbenz et al. (2010).

  4. 4.

    Langner (2011), Li and Lai (2011).

  5. 5.

    Al-Jarrah and Arafat (2014), Cheung et al. (2003), Cuppens and Miège (2002).

  6. 6.

    Majorczyk et al. (2007), Manqui et al. (2010).

  7. 7.

    Nelson (2010), Kloft and Laskov (2011), Olsavsky (2005).

  8. 8.

    Liu et al. (2012), Sood et al. (2012), Virvilis et al. (2013).

  9. 9.

    Kushner (2013), Lagner (2011).

  10. 10.

    Nelson (2010), Olsavsky (2005).

  11. 11.

    Ou et al. (2009), Oslavsky (2005).

  12. 12.

    Markou and Singh (2003).

  13. 13.

    Marsland (2003).

  14. 14.

    Roberts and Tarassenko (1994).

  15. 15.

    Markou and Singh (2003), Ou et al. (2009), Oslavsky (2005).

  16. 16.

    Chow (1970), Hansen et al. (1997).

  17. 17.

    Roberts and Tarassenko (1994).

  18. 18.

    Yeung and Ding (2002).

  19. 19.

    Markou and Singh (2003).

  20. 20.

    Freud (1905): pp. 147–149.

  21. 21.

    Yap and Calonzo (2016).

  22. 22.

    “The hackers chose the weekend in four countries as the opportune moment to break into the BB system. The weekly two-day bank holiday starts in Bangladesh at Thursday midnight and a day later in the US, the Philippines and Sri Lanka. Knowing that there would be no mutual correspondence immediately, around the midnight on February 4, a Thursday, the hackers sent the fake payment orders.”, Asian News, R.K. Byron and Md F. Rahman, “Hackers bugged Bangladesh Bank system in Jan”, March 11, 2016.

  23. 23.

    “Because it was a Friday—a weekend in Muslim-majority Bangladesh—Huda left the office around 11.15 am and asked colleagues to help fix the problem. It took them more than 24 h before they could manually print the receipts, which revealed dozens of questionable transactions that sent the bank racing to stop cash from leaving its account with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to the Philippines, Sri Lanka and beyond”, C. Yap and A. Calonzo, op. cit.

  24. 24.

    Byron (2016).

  25. 25.

    According to Byron, op. cit., “The funds were converted into pesos in various tranches to the bank accounts of Chinese national Weikang Xu, Eastern Hawaii Leisure Co and Bloomberry Hotels Inc (Solaire Resorts)”.

  26. 26.

    Such a preparation would consist of designing and crafting signals or behaviors so that they contrive a higher relative congruity value that intrinsic incongruous value to the receiver.

  27. 27.

    Garfinkel and Dinolt (2011).

  28. 28.

    Sterbenz et al. (2010), Fry et al. (2010).

  29. 29.

    Li and Lai (2011), Sood and Enbody (2012).

  30. 30.

    Ou et al. (2009).

  31. 31.

    Following Jones (1975) elaboration of the relativity of congruity and incongruity.

  32. 32.

    Juels and Yen (2012).

  33. 33.

    Jones (1978).

  34. 34.

    Cheung et al. (2003).

  35. 35.

    https://securelist.com/blog/research/58254/the-caretomask-apt-frequently-asked-questions/.

  36. 36.

    https://securelist.com/blog/incidents/32463/duqu-faq-33/.

  37. 37.

    https://securelist.com/blog/research/67741/regin-nation-state-ownage-of-gsm-networks/.

  38. 38.

    https://securelist.com/blog/research/68750/equation-the-death-star-of-malware-galaxy/.

  39. 39.

    https://securelist.com/analysis/publications/75533/faq-the-projectsauron-apt/.

  40. 40.

    “ProjectSauron: top level cyber-espionage platform covertly extracts encrypted government comms”, Kapersky Secure List, August 8, 2016.

  41. 41.

    “Once installed, the main ProjectSauron modules start working as ‘sleeper cells’, displaying no activity of their own and waiting for ‘wake-up’ commands in the incoming network traffic. This method of operation ensures ProjectSauron’s extended persistence on the servers of targeted organizations” (Kapersky Secure List, op. cit.).

  42. 42.

    “Predictions for 2017: Indicators of compromise are dead”, Kapersky Lab annual report, https://kasperskycontenthub.com/securelist/files/2016/11/KL_Predictions_2017.pdf.

  43. 43.

    http://usa.kaspersky.com/about-us/press-center/press-releases/2016/Clues_are_Dead-Kaspersky_Lab_Researchers_Announce_Threat_Predictions_for_2017.

  44. 44.

    Cuppens and Miège (2002).

  45. 45.

    Almgren et al. (2008).

References

  • Al-Jarrah O, Arafat A (2014) Network intrusion detection system using attack behavior classification. In: 5th international conference on Information and communication systems (ICICS), 2014 pp 1–6, 1–3

    Google Scholar 

  • Almgren M, Lindqvist U, Jonsson E (2008) A multi-sensor model to improve automated attack detection. In: 11th international symposium on recent advances in intrusion detection, RAID

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumard P (1994) From noticing to making sense: using intelligence to develop strategy. Int J Intell Counterintelligence 7(1)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bierly PE, Gallagher S, Spender JC (2008) Innovation and learning in high-reliability organizations: a case study of united states and russian nuclear attack submarines, 1970–2000. IEEE Trans Eng manag 55(3):393–408. doi:10.1109/TEM.2008.922643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourrier M (1996) Organizing maintenance work at two American nuclear power plants. J Contingencies Crisis Manag 4(2):104–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byron RK (2016) Hackers’ bid to steal $870 m more from Bangladesh central bank foiled. Asian News

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung S, Lindqvist U, Fong MW (2003) Modeling multistep cyber attacks for scenario recognition. In: DARPA information survivability conference and exposition (DISCEX III), Washington, D.C, pp 284–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Chow CK (1970) On optimum recognition error and reject tradeoff. IEEE Trans Inf Theor IT-16(1):41–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuppens F, Miège A (2002) Alert correlation in a cooperative intrusion detection framework. In: IEEE symposium on security and privacy

    Google Scholar 

  • Freud S (1905) Jokes and their relation to the unconscious, (trans: Strachey J). Routledge and Kegan Paul, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fry M, Fischer M, Smith P (2010) Challenge identification for network resilience, 65th EURO-NF conference next generation internet (NGI 10). IEEE Press, pp. 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel SL, Dinolt G (2011) Operations with degraded security. IEEE Secur Priv 9(6):43–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen LK, Liisberg C, Salamon P (1997) The error-reject tradeoff. Open Syst Inf Dyn 4:159–184

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Jones RV (1975) The theory of practical joking–an elaboration. Inst Math its Appl 11(2):10–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones RV (1978) Most secret war: british scientific intelligence 1939–1945. Hamish Hamilton, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Juels A, Yen T-F (2012) Sherlock holmes and the case of the advanced persistent threat. In: 5th USENIX workshop on large-scale exploits and emergent threats (LEET)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kloft M, Laskov P (2011) Online anomaly detection under adversarial impact. In: JMLR workshop and conference proceedings 9 (AISTATS 2010), 12 May–14 May 2010, Sardinia, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kushner D (2013) The real story of stuxnet. IEEE Spectr 50(3):48–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langner R (2011) Stuxnet: dissecting a cyberwarfare weapon. Secur Priv IEEE 9(3):49–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li F, Lai A (2011) Evidence of advanced persistent threat: a case study of malware for political espionage. In: 6th international conference on malicious and unwanted software proceedings, pp 102–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu S-T, Chen Y-M, Hung H-C (2012) N-Victims: an approach to determine N-victims for APT investigations. In: Information security applications. (Lecture notes in computer science), vol 7690, pp 226-240

    Google Scholar 

  • Majorczyk F, Totel E, Mé L, (2007) Monitoring a network service without knowing the threats?. RNSA conference proceedings

    Google Scholar 

  • Markou M, Singh S (2003) Novelty detection: a review—part1: statistical approaches. Sig process 83:2481–2497

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Marsland S (2003) Novelty detection in learning systems. Neural comput surv 3(2):157–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller GA, Galanter E, Pribram KH (1960) Plans and the structure of behavior. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Morreall, J (1987) Funny ha-ha, funny strange, and other reactions to incongruity. In: Morreall J (ed) The philosophy of laughter and humor. State University of New York Press, Albany

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson B (2010) Behavior of Machine Learning Algorithms in Adversarial Environments. (PhD dissertation). University of California, Berkeley, Department of EECS technical report UCB/EECS-2010-140. November 23

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsavsky VL (2005) Implementing a patternless intrusion detection system a methodology for Zippo. Ph Dissertation, Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School

    Google Scholar 

  • Ou, X, Rajagopalan SR, Sakthivelmurugan S (2009) An empirical approach to modeling uncertainty in intrusion analysis.In: 2009 annual computer security applications conference proceedings pp 494–503

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauterberg M (1995) About a framework for information and information processing of learning systems. In: Proceedings of the IFIP international working conference on information system concepts: towards a consolidation of views. Chapman & Hall, Ltd. London, UK, pp 54–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts S, Tarassenko L (1994) A probabilistic resource allocating network for novelty detection. Neural Comput 6:270–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roschlin GI, Meier AV (1994) Nuclear Power Operations: A Cross-Cultural Perspective.Annu Rev Energ Env 19(1): 153–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Shultz TR (1972) The role of incongruity and resolution in children’s appreciation of jokes and cartoons: an information-processing analysis. J Exp Child Psychol 13:456–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sood AK., Enbody R (2012) Targeted cyber attacks—a superset of advanced persistent threats, IEEE Secur Priv 99

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterbenz JPG et al (2010) Resilience and survivability in communication networks: strategies, principles, and survey of disciplines. Comput Netw 54(8):1245–1265

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Virvilis N, Gritzalis D, Apostolopoulos T (2013) Trusted computing vs. advanced persistent threats: can a defender win this game? In: Ubiquitous intelligence and computing, 2013 IEEE 10th international conference on and 10th international conference on autonomic and trusted computing (uic/atc), pp 396–403, 18–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Yap C, Calonzo A (2016) Printer error foiled billion-dollar bank heist. Sydney Morning Herald

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeung DY, Ding Y (2002) Host-based intrusion detection using dynamic and static behavioral models. Pattern Recognition 36:229–243

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers, Paris, France

    Philippe Baumard

  2. School of Economic Warfare—ESLSCA, Paris, France

    Philippe Baumard

Authors
  1. Philippe Baumard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philippe Baumard .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Baumard, P. (2017). National Cyber-Doctrines: Forthcoming Strategic Shifts. In: Cybersecurity in France. SpringerBriefs in Cybersecurity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54308-6_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54308-6_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54306-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54308-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation