If anything illustrates why the executive-level of any organization – civilian, military or governmental – holds things-cyber in such low regard (based on their actions/decisions), it’s captured in the report that the Anonymous group has decided (subject to confirmation as this is being drafted) that they will not, in fact, conduct an operation against the Las Zetas narco-cartel. A token study of the Zetas would have revealed that they’re not strangers to the use of technology, and of course unlike digital adversaries, their response to attempts to deny or degrade their operations is gruesomely kinetic, not virtual.
Why is, despite the hype, “cyber war” an also-ran to old-fashioned shooting war? Why is bank robbery more successfully pursued and prosecuted than online heists? Why, despite terabytes of data and billions of dollars lost, are most companies still woefully under-protected from digital threats?
The bottom line is that you can’t dodge actual bullets, but there are myriad ways to defer or pass along the risks associated with operations online. For the fourth (or fifth?) time: until “cyber” can kill to scale this is the most talked-about and expensive also-ran security problem the world has ever seen.