" We've seen how cyber threats, including ransomware attacks, increasingly are able to cause damage and disruption to the real world "

We have indeed - for decades, and it gets worse rather than better as time passes. But there wouldn't be anything like such a scale of threat if we could persuade developers to write software that wasn't littered with rather obvious silly errors. There are no more than around half a dozen critical metal-level cock-ups that have kept getting perpetrated for some four decades, and with all their rigor, even OWASP only cite 10 common critical web development errors. That's (being generous) less than 20 things any developer should know about and avoid - but they don't and they don't. So we have fragile bug-riddled software that requires constant "updates", and for some bizarre reason we find that perfectly acceptable. Until we get breached.

Until software development becomes a real engineering discipline (with global verified standards and rigorous oversight of compliance with them) we'll continue spiralling downward into the pit, as, on the one hand, we rely on software more and more in every aspect of our lives, and on the other it becomes less and less trustworthy.

There are around 30,000 parts in a car. There are hundreds of thousands of lines of code in a software if you include the libraries, and millions if you include the OS. Software has a complexity that as few equivalence IRL. Add to this the speed of development and changes in IT, pushed by the Moore Law. Car parts are rarely new, screws are a tested, proven technology for long, we know a lot about the materials and how to make them safe and secure. It's totally different in IT. Everything is moving, and fast, and faster. The technology we use now will probably be obsolete in 10 years.

Even if we improve methods to make software more reliant, it won't eliminate bugs and security breaches. It's way too complex: too many layers, too many interfaces. Look at the space industry, which tests, retests and tests again. It didn't stop Mars Climate Orbiter to crash because of a conversion error, or the first Ariane 5 to explode because of a float overflow.

Of course, we have to code better. But we should always keep in mind the code will be defective and will enable cyberattacks. Improved software development is one layer of protection, but it cannot be the only one.

Those writing/maintaining the software have to get it right 100% of the time. The attacker only has to find one place they got it wrong.

And the attacker doesn't need to be part of an army or even a group, he can be all alone and responsible to no one. He doesn't need to put himself at risk like a sniper or a terrorist planting IEDs. He can attack from the safety of his bedroom halfway around the world in a country that doesn't care what he does so long as he's not attacking their allies, and won't extradite.

It still remains as a matter of fact that software development is the only branch of engineering (granting it that courtesy) in which practitioners are allowed to be entirely self-taught and don't have to be certified against any global objective standards.

That alone needs to be fixed if things are to improve, as can be verified by no more than a cursory overview of the general quality of questions and answers at Stack Overflow.

Complete waste of time. It would take micro seconds for the Indian community and others to produce false certifications. Unless you push them through an observed test as part of the interview it's guaranteed you will not get what is on the tin.

I guess the corollary is still true that if someone puts "fact" in caps or bold, generally what follows is certainly not a fact.

At one point in my life, I thought automotive companies would be worried about cyber attacks. The truth is that they are not.

They buy cyberinsurance between $1-$10 per car. Maybe even less. Then they make a lot of noise.

The only automaker serious about security is Tesla. And that is because they are a nice target. Teslas are a high end multiprocessor computers with a motor and a battery connected to their fleet management software.

@Potemkine

Computer systems are, as you observe, the most complicated machines made by man. But the biological world is much more complex. First the complexity of proteins; then the bacterial cell; then the eucaryotic cell; then plants and animals; then what we call our brains. (That with which we think we think - Ambrose Bierce.)

But nature proceeds by small changes, and takes a lot of time. Bugs crop up along the way, e.g. the human loss of the ability to synthesise vitamin C.

Wholeheartedly agree with Potemkine.

And never forget that the bad guys are not the coders but those that are doing the attacking. And the attackers are no longer script kiddies, it is at the governmental level and they have the budgets and capabilites to do far more than one might imagine..

And don't forget the real issue here, Joe Biden is preparing for whatever war the USA had decided to start within the next 2 years.... Which undoubtedly they will....

And don't forget the real issue here, Joe Biden is preparing for whatever war the USA had decided to start within the next 2 years.... Which undoubtedly they will.... .... Khaptain

One would have thought that being such a constant serial loser in such an enterprise that entertains and provides victims of war, would have them realising the error of their ways. The fact that it mightn't and/or doesn't must be a reflection on their lack of available in-house, actionable non self-destructive nationalised intelligence.

I wouldn't be that generous to the coders. The pushback I get when I point out obvious vulnerabilities would make you think I was stealing their first born. In fact developers HIDE their systems from security teams to prevent them from getting audited.

I remember I found a vulnerable web server in a system once and requested it be replaced with a less vulnerable version. The team just moved it to a different port, well-known in fact, hoping that I would get fooled that they were running something else.

Is Bidenesque FUD the new MAD and does Uncle Sam intend to be world leader in that too? Go for it Joe. You're a star in the making with the following high bar and low tide mark to overcome and improve upon ....

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." — President George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., August 5, 2004

Is there something strange and deranging in the 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. water supply/intelligence source provision ‽ .

So the WH should stand down? What exactly are you proposing?

So the WH should stand down? What exactly are you proposing? .... A random security guy

If they could cease and desist from scoring so many damaging own goals would be immediately quite helpful, A random security guy.

Is there something strange and deranging in the 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. water supply/intelligence source provision ‽ .

No, there's something in the electoral process that ensures normalish people can't get elected.

People thought Trump was an anomaly, when in fact he was just less subtle.

"People thought Trump was an anomaly, when in fact he was just less subtle."

The new guy is just less of everything, especially the neurons... The media are propping him up for the moment but I get the feeling that that's not going to last for long now....

We can see it in the press conferences that the media are starting to attack, just as they did with Trump, the difference being that Trump's was at least funny and laughable whereas with Biden it's just plain embarrasing..

Nations will not behave if there are no controls. No government does. And neither do most people.

The simple fact is that the US really WANTS war with China and will use any means to justify it. The madness is they think they can win.

The purpose of war isn't very obvious. In many respects the US lost the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. where they had various degrees of involvement. The US doesn't believe in colonialism. It believes in projection of power.

Think about the destruction the US can cause and the number of leaders it can humiliate. There was Saddam Hussein, strutting around like a rooster. The US got to him.

Would you like to pick a fight with the US? You know you are going to get hammered.

The cost to the US? The lives of a large number of underpaid, underprivileged US soldiers and some cash that goes to the Military Industrial Complex.

China has been a troublemaker in that region since Mao's time. None of its neighbors except for Pakistan like it.

The stage is set. We don't know how the cards will play out.

War = Economics

Bidens current politics don't look as though they are doing anything to restart the economy so war will likely be his only solution.

What we don't know yet is whether it will be a civil war or an external war...

Downvoted for arrogance and stupidity. Bad case of SLS (Slow Learner's Syndrome) there I think.

BTW -- What makes the post author (and the American establishment) think that the US will be able to identify cyber-attackers well enough to target retaliation? Most likely any attack on the US will appear to come from someplace(s) other than their actual source. It'll very likely be like the still poorly understood 2016 attacks on US and Canadian diplomats in Habana and elsewhere(?) in 2016. Real most likely. But a mystery.

If you ask me, the US and others would do well to start identifying their critical infrastructure and moving/keeping it off public networks. Even if that interferes with some folk's (planned) profits.

Isn't Biden a Democrat?

...look what Russia is doing already about the 2022 elections and misinformation. It's a pure violation of our sovereignty.

Pot, meet Kettle.

Not so nice when it's not the US doing that to other countries, is it?

Fight a war when you intend to win -- Never threaten to start a war when all chips are down.

[1]Joint Chiefs Seek A New Warfighting Paradigm After Devastating Losses In Classified Wargames

[1] https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41712/joint-chiefs-seek-a-new-warfighting-paradigm-after-devastating-losses-in-classified-wargames