February 23, 2025

10 thoughts on “Cyber is to electronic warfare as rain is to a dam

  1. Very thought provoking, Sam! Very good.

    The original mission statement for the US Cyber Command included four separate EMS statements. I’ve tried to find again, but I can’t prove it. It was, of course, a draft and I never got to see where the EMS statements went or why. With this full disclosure it was apparent at the time that the US Cyber Command recognized that cyber uses the EMS… I believe the intent was to include satellite connections on a strategic basis and WiFi, WiMax and the like tactically.

    Could the world of cyber not use the EMS? Yes, but it would really slow things down terribly.

    Once again I’m also going to have to defer to your better judgement as to what we call the electronic carrier waves within our systems. Electricity does not fall within the EMS, I’m curious where electricity belongs now that I think about it.

    1. First, we have to understand a few things. The US Cyber Command, a completely owned subsidiary of the NSA, is not an expert at cyber. They are an expert at their use of cyber. Federal government policy, United States military doctrine, and similar do not define cyber and are fully capable of being really stupid about it. I can give significant examples of other areas of science in the past that government simply was to stupid to accomplish anything. From nuclear weapons to the principles of flight.

      You are completely incorrect in thinking that things would be really slow if we abandoned EMS or didn’t use it for cyber. The fastest super computer in the world is an analog, chemical based, monster of computational power. There are about 7 billion of them. The focus on EMS in dealing with the brain has come with huge problems. Scientists now know that the human brain has a huge chemical component to how it processes information (that is why drugs and anesthesia work, and why a few drinks lubricates a coed prior to frivolity). We are easily in reach of using “junk” DNA as a storage mechanism and we’ve already bypassed security standards and have fully developed steganography of DNA science.

      What you’re doing by your examples is focusing on the transmission mechanisms. That is what almost all of the current government, military, and aficionados stating cyber is EMS are doing. They focus on the thing they feel they have the most control over. And, they completely miss all of the other states of information.

      This is not an argument of semantics. It is an argument for understanding the totality of the problem and threat set towards national security. There are significant issues with focusing on on one part (EMS) and often one small part of that (transmission) in a much larger paradigm. There are even larger issues in the way cyber is linked to conflict when it is part of the human existence far beyond the “war” moniker. While government entities are worried about a simplistic element an entire set of other problems are starting to rise.

      What happens the first time a virus writes a national security secret into a spies DNA? Why no I don’t have any digital media and as I leave your country I’m clean and you’re secure. Or, maybe not.

      Also, don’t focus on just the DNA examples given here. They are just that, examples. There is a lot of different ways that human interactions with information (the true cyber domain) are going to be expressed. It is all about the man-machine, man-information, man-data, interaction and interface. Not just the EMS. Not just EW. While people are looking at only that an entire set of other problems are rising up to bite them. They will not understand that they had an entire science to pull from that was first developed in the 1950s. For that, I blame politicians, and rice bowl nazis.

  2. I sit corrected. Electricity is in the EMS but it’s called electrical power in the below graphic.

    http://www.eirgridprojects.com/media/emf.gif

    So, perhaps it is better said cyber only uses one specific frequency range?

    I read a lot of the strong relationship between electricity, light, and magnetism. Interesting. I guess it boils down to what your definition of “is” is.

  3. Agreed. Good points. I think of the processing (DNA computers, etc) as one point in the whole of cyberspace and the communications piece links it all together as the world of cyber. Not sure how those 7 billion supercomputing humans fit into that picture except as consumers, programmers, users, etc…

    1. It is a man-machine interface problem. Though it is beginning to look like machine-to-machine will become a factor. Without the human the cyber component is nothing but processing. So, those billions of humans in the loop represent a huge contingent of processing power and a specific role in the existence of cyber. So, yes they are consumers, programmers, and users but they are critical. From our perspective we really don’t care about much more than those people and the interactions, but from a larger view they are still part of the system. Regardless, of the technology the human is critical. Today.

  4. I see the basis for a good article, defining what you just wrote, Sam. Teach outside the classroom, like you school me. The need for your teaching is greater than you can imagine.

    1. Joel, you’re my friend and are interested in the topic. Understand I’m not upset when I say nobody cares. Literally, nobody cares about cyber beyond the EMS. There is a huge strategic blind spot but until it is exploited there is no concern. There is no way to even detect an exploitation at this time. There is no money for research, and there is so much in rice-bowl-politics that anything beyond cyber as EMS is considered “fringe”. That is why I blog versus write books or academic articles on the topic. Nobody cares except for a few people. My cyber warfare book with Bob Miller is strictly inside the lines (as it should be). I do have a day job after all. The best I can hope for is infecting the “stratpack” and a few others with the ideas and try a Boydian strategic culture infection through memetic repetition. So far. Well it ain’t working.

Comments are closed.