Information Warfare: Survival of the Fittest

Introduction

Various groups provide definitions for Information warfare (IW) based on their own contexts. For example, IW within a military context is any action to deny, exploit, corrupt, or destroy the enemy’s information and its functions while exploiting internal information functions. Although it has been defined in several different ways, the term has appeared increasingly in books, articles, professional military journals, and official publications (DiNardo & Hughes, 1995). In the mid-nineties, the IW concept became popular within certain circles of the U.S. defense establishment as a result of the indisputable fact that information and information technologies (IT) are increasingly important to national security in general, and warfare specifically (Libicki, 1995). There are techniques to mastering IW, and those who do master these techniques will find themselves at an advantage over those who have not.

IW is based on the assumption that information technologies have developed to the point where they can now be employed as a weapon in their own right, and thus wars can be won or lost without shots being fired (Ryan, 1995). The driving forces behind IW include the increasing recognition of information as a strategic asset and the continuing evolution of technology. As stated in a comment by the Washington Post, Schwartau (1996) reports that information warriors could modify credit reports, bank accounts, driving records, and plane reservations. Such malicious acts could bring the stock exchange to a halt. Nothing is safe, and our vulnerabilities come through loud and clear. The possibilities are enough to induce paranoia. As a result, IW is increasingly important to the military, business, and intelligence community. However, eradicating information attacks is not a realistic expectation. A more pragmatic approach would be to protect information and other resources by thoroughly understanding IW and developing formal frameworks to ensure its successful implementation.

IW involves strategies and multilayered attacks. Most of the time, these strategies and attacks are complex. Recently, in view of an increase in terrorist activities, governments are beginning to expand computer network attack capabilities in a silent information war. The inherent vulnerability and accessibility of the Internet makes such a war very possible and easy to achieve. Advanced IW methodologies include creating huge networks of remote-controlled machines or “botnets” that attack corporate or government Web sites or send out false messages. News reports also confirm the significance of IW in the 21^st century. For example, the Washington Post (Wolf, 2006) stated that the U.S. Airforce was setting up what would become a new four-star command to fight in cyberspace, and stated that the U.S. had already come under attack from China among others. Other recent headlines, like one from the New York Times (Markoff, 2007), confirm that botnets are secretly installing themselves on millions of personal computers and using the collective powers of the evolved network to commit Internet crimes.

The problem of cyberwarfare is not only for well-known or relatively large countries. Cyrus Farivar (2007) in a recent article described the small, wired country of Estonia, in which parking meters can be paid for via cell phone, Wi-Fi can be accessed at every gas station, and national elections can be voted for via personal computers, but is the first government to get targeted for large-scale cyberwarfare. Also, there are various levels and scopes associated with information warfare. Thus, in studying the details surrounding IW, it is important to acquire background information on the topic, and thus the following section provides a background for foundational IW-related elements. A Survival-of-the-Fittest IW framework is then presented, Followed by an analysis of the proposed framework, while the chapter concludes in with framework limitations and a summary.