Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
So forget about Peterson of course is we tell you about the growing threat of cyber terrorism in new intelligence shows.
Iran was behind the most destructive cyber attack on a company ever.
The target was Saudi aramco and that was last August and it could -- in retaliation.
Or computer virus that attacked Iranian oil companies last may.
But it all boils down to what's coming next is what's important.
An attack on US electric grids water supplies and even chemical plants here for an exclusive interview with the potential impact of this crippling type of warfare is -- Colonel -- Layton a former member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and a cyber security analyst colonel welcome back to show thanks for joining us.
It's my pleasure blitzer thanks for having me so we've got X faded the US -- Iran it for the debilitating attack on Saudi aramco and apparently you know it took over a large percentage of the computers it showed a burning American -- Does this surprise you.
Not really hit and -- -- the reason I say that is because.
You know you have the entire environment with viruses like -- -- and flame being attributed to the United States.
Those viruses attacked the uranium infrastructure.
-- particularly the infrastructure that was related to the nuclear.
Proliferation aspect that the Iranians happened when you do -- have that you're having a tit for tat between the Iranians and us.
And does so in that sense it did not surprise me the escalation of this though is something that everybody should take into account and prepare accordingly.
Without question -- this crosses the line where we're seeing.
You know government attacks find it -- -- Saudi aramco is in a private company obviously it's government owned but now we're worried about the retaliation against US companies.
Even if there utilities and the White House is planning and implementing an executive order.
That would direct US spy agencies to share -- the information they have.
With companies and I wonder you know who operate on the electric grid and other things that you definitely impact the public welfare but it's still.
I don't know does that make you nervous are they are there negative extra now -- to -- There are some negative extra analogies I think it is a good thing that -- the intelligence community use going to be asked to share information with.
Private companies to -- private companies that are protecting the infrastructure.
There's a piece of this where for example companies will not have -- just an executive order and not legislation they will not have liability protection.
And that's that's one big negative piece the other part of it is is that civil liberties.
Are also part of this.
I ended the executive order may not assuage the concerns of people like the ACLU when it comes to protecting.
In -- making sure that to be private to details such as specific names of individuals and things like that.
Are kept out of the government to process as they work with private companies.
But there are ways to safeguard against that the question is will -- executive order cover those processes and make those processes mandatory both for government.
And for the civilian sector.
I -- because I mean this business showed it puts companies that are really precarious situation on one hand they're asked to look out.
For national security and public welfare which makes a lot of sense especially when you're in the business of being the utility when you have electric -- or the water -- the same time.
I mean you're number one -- -- -- their shareholders that's -- they're supposed to think of first.
And their opening -- their shareholders to this sort of liability it's a very hard decision to -- eight.
Can the government make it easier for that.
And the government should make it easier for them into one of the ways to do that is to -- we've championed comprehensive cyber security legislation in the congress.
There were two measures that basically.
Made it past the first troubles I didn't congress and one in the senate and the other one in the house both those measures failed.
But there that shows that there is a lot of congressional interest in this in there has to be your way.
To make it work in terms of the legislative process and to ensure that there's liability protection the executive order can only go so far and because of that.
-- we have a situation where the executive order is not going to be a complete answer -- will be a partial answer.
But it will be what are -- situations where the companies are going to be reluctant.
-- because they don't have that liability protection they're also a going to be very like you said.
Very beholden to their shirt shorts because they're making money for them we're trying to at least and they have to protect shareholders' equities.
But they also have to make sure that their businesses are.
-- you viable and continued we continually viable entity.
And -- -- this -- that is really the danger that we're talking about here because we although how dangerous the big blackout can be for -- are but -- how.
I mean what's the potential do you think that terrorists could taint the water supply or or even -- take control of a chemical plant how dangerous do you think this really yes.
It is very dangerous and the reason I say that is because we have had instances in the past for example in Australia there was an instance.
You -- been that involved the thirty security.
-- sewage plant worker.
Who got angry yet today's his bosses and decided to didn't introduce a virus into the system that -- to -- -- sewage.
The rate of sewage flow into clean water and did that caused a major major fallout in the in that -- Australian city.
So you have these situations it is very possible for it to happen.
And that is why it becomes important for the government and the private sector to really work together to clean this up.
Yes -- staff Karl thank you so much for coming on.
My pleasure Melissa.
Filter by section