Red Cross Seeks 'Digital Emblem' To Protect Against Hacking (apnews.com) 50
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Associated Press: The International Committee of the Red Cross said Thursday it is seeking support to create a "digital red cross/red crescent emblem" that would make clear to military and other hackers that they have entered the computer systems of medical facilities or Red Cross offices. The Geneva-based humanitarian organization said it was calling on governments, Red Cross and Red Crescent societies, and IT experts to join forces in developing "concrete ways to protect medical and humanitarian services from digital harm during armed conflict."
For over 150 years, symbols such as the red cross have been used to make clear that "in times of armed conflict, those who wear the red cross or facilities and objects marked with them must be protected from harm," the ICRC said. That same obligation should apply online, the organization said, noting that hacking operations in conflicts were likely to increase as more militaries develop cyber capabilities. The organization said that for the proposed "digital emblem" to become reality, nations worldwide would have to agree on its use and make it part of international humanitarian law alongside existing humanitarian insignia. It hopes the emblem would identify the computer systems of protected facilities much as a red cross or crescent on a hospital roof does in the real world. "The International Committee of the Red Cross said that it has identified three technical possibilities: a DNS-based emblem that would use a special label to link it to a domain name; an IP-based emblem; and an ADEM, or authenticated digital emblem, system that would use certificate chains to signal protection," adds the report.
For over 150 years, symbols such as the red cross have been used to make clear that "in times of armed conflict, those who wear the red cross or facilities and objects marked with them must be protected from harm," the ICRC said. That same obligation should apply online, the organization said, noting that hacking operations in conflicts were likely to increase as more militaries develop cyber capabilities. The organization said that for the proposed "digital emblem" to become reality, nations worldwide would have to agree on its use and make it part of international humanitarian law alongside existing humanitarian insignia. It hopes the emblem would identify the computer systems of protected facilities much as a red cross or crescent on a hospital roof does in the real world. "The International Committee of the Red Cross said that it has identified three technical possibilities: a DNS-based emblem that would use a special label to link it to a domain name; an IP-based emblem; and an ADEM, or authenticated digital emblem, system that would use certificate chains to signal protection," adds the report.
maybe some day (Score:3)
Nice idea. Until every node waves the Red Cross/Crescent. Maybe when we have a quantum internet it will become feasible.
Re: (Score:3)
How is that any different to real life, where there is nothing to stop militaries abusing the Red Cross? Well, except that it's a war crime, but as long as you win there is little chance of ever being prosecuted.
As if (Score:5, Insightful)
When the Red Cross and other organizations gave specific locations of hospitals in Syria to the Syrian government and its Russian backers as a way to protect them, each and every hospital was deliberately bombed by Russia and Syria [nytimes.com].
In Ukraine, Russia has done the same thing [sky.com].
If the Red Cross and Red Crescent and whomever else thinks having an "emblem" will protect them, they're delusional.
Re:As if (Score:5, Insightful)
If the Red Cross and Red Crescent and whomever else thinks having an "emblem" will protect them, they're delusional.
It protects them in the exact same way laws against murder protect you from being shot dead.
This fantasy you invented implying laws a preventative measures in anyway beyond a possible deterrent is the delusion.
Despite people like yourself that argue laws against murder are worthless, the vast majority of the world would still rather have those laws in place, knowing they will cause consequences after the fact.
This is no different.
You are obviously unaware, but it is Russia breaking these "worthless" laws as you call them, that has legitimized the rest of the world cutting off Russia from the global economy.
They are the very thing enabling the cutoff of their support.
Look at it from the other side too. Ukraine is actually following international law by NOT attacking humanitarian personnel, and due to following that law, they are receiving significant support from other NATO nations, despite Ukraine not being a NATO member.
Russia has requested similar support from their own allies, and all of their allies except Syria and North Korea refuse to do so, showing the deterrent effect works.
Even China has told them to kindly fuck off and stop making them look bad.
The delusion here is believing everything in the world is as simple as black and white, and nothing in between can possibly exist. That is just insanity.
Re: (Score:1)
But the best part is the defense of Russia's actions:
They weren't left with much else to do.
Directly followed by:
Do note that nowhere do I agree nor do I support nor defend Russia's stance. I'm just saying, if you look at it from their PoV...
Thanks for your input Ivan. I will be taking it with a rather large grain of salt.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm unsure why you chose to put the word worthless in quotes. We all know that no group has ever used hospitals to house soldiers.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps because he was quoting the OP?
Re: (Score:2)
ignore, my bad. OP did not say it.
Re: (Score:2)
My bad. Ignore my comment. thx
Re: (Score:2)
Just saying it doesn't actually make it true. Reality is a lot stickier than your vodka-soaked delusions.
Re: (Score:1)
Please provide one link, anonymous coward.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The claims in that link are pretty vague. They amount to someone, either Ukraine or Russia or both used cluster munitions in the Donbas region in 2014/2015. Whether or not they were used against civilians is less clear. Technically they're not banned weapons, though everyone agrees superficially that they should not be used against civilian targets. Evidence strongly points to Russian use of cluster munition use against civilian targets intentionally though, not just in 2014/2015, but repeatedly up until th
Re: (Score:2)
long before Putin knocked on the front door.
You're saying that the fighting in the Donbas region _predated_ Putin metaphorically knocking on the front door in Ukraine? What kind of warped view of history is that? The fighting in the Luhansk and Donetsk regions was specifically due to Russian mercenaries, sent by Putin, invading the area.
Re: (Score:3)
In Syria, it was partly because the local guerrillas deliberately setup up camp as close as possible to the hospitals. I've personally no idea if the same occurred in Ukraine, but Israel encounters the same problem with Palestine.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
In Syria, it was partly because the local guerrillas deliberately setup up camp as close as possible to the hospitals. I've personally no idea if the same occurred in Ukraine, but Israel encounters the same problem with Palestine.
Bullshit. The hospitals in Syria were out in the open, with the red cross easily visible from the air. There were no camps anywhere near these. In some cases the hospitals were moved to caves and those were bombed.
As for Palestine, Israel's apartheid causes those issues. If Israel would stop occuyping Palesitnian land there wouldn't be an issue.
Re: (Score:2)
If Israel would stop occuyping Palesitnian land there wouldn't be an issue.
Muh Zions!
Re: (Score:2)
When the Red Cross and other organizations gave specific locations of hospitals in Syria to the Syrian government and its Russian backers as a way to protect them, each and every hospital was deliberately bombed by Russia and Syria [nytimes.com].
In Ukraine, Russia has done the same thing [sky.com].
If the Red Cross and Red Crescent and whomever else thinks having an "emblem" will protect them, they're delusional.
Odd that it would take the Red Cross to identify where hospitals are. I'm pretty sure Russia or Syria could have figured out how to type a "hospitals near me" request in many a navigational online offering used the world over for the last decade or so. For any major regional hospital, their locations end up about as "secret" as the local McDonalds.
That said, you're correct. Emblems won't protect anyone in war where pretty much all bets are off. We can talk about civility and Conventions we've agreed to
Re: (Score:3)
Odd that it would take the Red Cross to identify where hospitals are.
Some of these were makeshift hospitals due to the fact Russia and Syria had bombed the original hospitals. The Red Cross wanted these places clearly identified in an attempt to protect them.
Instead, Russia and Syria used the coordiantes for targeting.
Re: (Score:2)
I can hardly wait for your "it's OK when we do it" retort.
That is literally what you just did.
Re: (Score:2)
Those are war crimes & specifically identified as such but unlikely to go prosecuted because of who's involved, i.e. the Hague are unlikely to indict & prosecute Saudi, US, or UK leaders or generals.
However, that doesn't diminish the deterrent effects of having international laws & criminal courts for try
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Hey ASCII-art Nazi Swastika guy! (Score:1)
\_/\âoe"⮩Âââs|Ã--^\\{^â
How'd I do?
Ammunition in ambulances (Score:1, Troll)
What does the current emblem protect? (Score:2)
What good is that gonna do? (Score:5, Insightful)
make clear to military and other hackers that they have entered the computer systems of medical facilities or Red Cross offices.
Hackers already hit hospitals with ransomware [nbcnews.com] and they know perfectly well who they're hurting. How is the digital Red Cross going to stop them? It would only work if they had principles and they clearly don't.
Re: (Score:2)
A digital Red Cross is little more than a login banner. On Government systems holding classified data, the login banner is quite extensive, warning you about all the bad shit that could happen to you if you abuse that system.
All of it means nothing without enforcement.
Hackers get caught and prosecuted? Chop off a limb and force them to report to the closest medical facility with a mandatory 3-hour wait to simulate a hacked environment. See how that works out for them. "Hacking" will put an entertainin
The Red cross should focus on securing their shit (Score:4, Insightful)
Then nobody could enter their systems and they wouldn't need to warn attackers that they're hitting nice people in the first place.
Re: (Score:1)
Evil bit (Score:2)
"Can I trust you ?" (Score:2)
"Oh, thank goodness."
I have a suggestion... (Score:1)
Unless you're Russia: (Score:2)
Pardon me while I get nostalgic (Score:1)
X.509 (Score:2)
robots.txt (Score:1)
Disallow: Russkis
Very forward looking (Score:1)
Cyberwar is an emerging form of war and the Red Cross needs a method to identify their systems so they aren't attacked.
What's to stop them from being attacked anyhow? Only self-interest: if you don't attack mine, I won't attack yours.
Re: (Score:2)
How little they understand... (Score:1)
Arisians (Score:2)