Rough and Ready: Frameworks to Measure Persistent Engagement and Deterrence
summary
Proposes three concrete ways to judge whether U.S. persistent engagement reduces or increases cyber attacks: use the government’s incident severity schema to standardize when events count as significant, track OPM-style counts of specific attack types and watch the direction of the trend, and run adversary-specific deep dives (e.g., FireEye/Chinese commercial espionage) plus case studies of disruptive operations (OilRig, APT1, Conficker) to bound effects while controlling for detection, IoT growth, attribution, and political causes.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (20)
- 0:00Introduction
- 1:18Introductions
- 4:27The Debate
- 7:35Defending Forward
- 11:04The Process
- 12:49The Government
- 14:29Basic Frameworks
- 14:48Incident Severity Schema
- 17:41Opium Example
- 18:25The Hawks
- 20:26Deep Dive
- 29:14What do we do
- 31:28Duration of disruption
- 31:44Potential reasons for delay
- 32:37Frameworks
- 32:55Oil Rig Group
- 34:51APPLE
- 37:19Timeline
- 38:09Call to Action
- 41:14Attribution
related talks
32mAre US Cyber Deterrence Operations Suppressing or Inciting Attacks?
40mDeterrence and Strategic Response to Cyber Operations
40mTotal Security: Investigative Perspectives from Public to Private Sector
27mThe Offensive Approach to Cybersecurity
50mStop Being Sitting Cyber Ducks! Adversary Engagement: the New Cyber-Defense
46mDeception Is on the Rise, But Is It Time to Unleash Engagement Operations?
27mRevisiting Known Perps: Behavioral Profiling for Continuous Monitoring of Threat Actors
40mStrengthening Cyber Resiliency in a Time of Geopolitical Crises...