Griffin on Tech: Cybersecurity concerns and media upheaval

At a cybersecurity research briefing I attended in Auckland yesterday there was plenty of talk of the treat posed by sophisticated Russian hackers behind ransomware and botnet attacks.

“But I thought Russia was no longer a threat?” I quipped, referring to US moves last week to suspend some of its cyber operations against Russia.

It turns out cybersecurity experts all the way down here in New Zealand are quite concerned about the Trump administration’s directive to dial back its cyber operations because it could make their job even harder.

A senior US official confirmed to CNN this week that offensive operations against Russia had been suspended at Cyber Command, the US military’s offensive and defensive cyber unit. The CIA and National Security Agency will keep on using cyber tools to spy on Russia, and the Cyber and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) will still defend against Russian-based attacks.

“The concern, the official said, is that the pause on offensive cyber operations against Russia will make the US more vulnerable to potential cyberattacks from Moscow, which has a formidable cadre of hackers capable of disrupting US critical infrastructure and collecting sensitive intelligence,” CNN reported.

The US Cyber Command was established over a decade ago with the explicit purpose of combatting cyber attacks from the likes of Russia. The US has vast cybersecurity spread across several agencies and regularly shares cybersecurity updates with its Five Eyes partners, who pass on alerts to local businesses and critical infrastructure providers.

Pivot to the Indo-Pacific

While President Trump may have a strategic goal in mind in standing down against Russia, namely bringing Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table to end the war in Ukraine and normalise relations with Russia so the US can focus on the Indo-Pacific region, the consequences could be severe.

Russia’s hackers, both the entrepreneurial types out to make money, and the hackers tasked with espionage missions by Moscow, will now have the ability to go about their business unmolested.

What are the types of offensive actions the US has taken against Russia in the cyber realm? It has conducted operations to support Ukraine’s defence against cyberattacks on its utility and transport networks, deployed “hunt-forward” teams to identify foreign agents and vulnerabilities in allied networks, taken action to disrupt Russian influence campaigns during U.S. elections, and taken down botnets built and deployed by Russian hackers.

Now those hackers will be rubbing their hands in glee at the prospect of having several months, or longer, to test the networks of Western targets without military offensives against them. Even a short pause in operations could be devastating given how quickly cybercrime tools of the trade evolve. We could also see hackers from China and North Korea exploit the move, masquerading as Russian hackers in an effort to get a free pass from the Americans.

Either way, its incredibly bad for cybersecurity worldwide. Coupled with that is the reduction in cyber capability resulting from the push to reduce government worker headcount in the US.

As Reuters reported: “More than 130 positions have been cut from the Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) as of Feb. 14.”

This all happens as new research reveals major flaws in US government website security. The Cybernews Business Digital Index shows that over half (53.7%) of U.S. government departments and agencies scored D or worse for their cybersecurity efforts, with 38.8% falling into the F category. Even 75% have been affected by data breaches, almost 54% have had corporate credentials stolen, and 27% have employees reusing compromised passwords.

Star journos bid farewell as billionaire swoops

Yesterday also saw NZME journalists gather at Auckland’s Empire Tavern to farewell senior journalists who are departing as a result of restructuring at the New Zealand Herald and BusinessDesk. Some big names are departing, including science writer Jamie Morton, investigative writer Nicholas Jones, political editor Claire Trevett, deputy business editor Grant Bradley, senior sports reporter Chris Rattue, specialist science reporter Jamie Morton, and feature writer and satirist Steve Braunias.

That’s a serious loss of talent and its driven by the need by NZME to reduce its cost base to accommodate a business model that works in the context of a soft advertising environment and competition from the large digital platforms. NZME’s recent results showed the company is doing well to keep its head above water, with its OneRoof property portal doing very well.

But as Duncan Greive speculated on an episode of his media podcast The Fold this week, OneRoof’s success may ultimately be bad news for the less profitable publishing arm of the company. He suggested NZME, which is undertaking a strategic review of OneRoof, is considering spinning the unit off as a standalone business. We’ve seen this play out across the Tasman where Fairfax Media’s highly successful Domain property listings website became the jewel in the crown for the company and was spun off as an ASX-listed company in 2017.

That could leave the publishing remnants of the business very vulnerable to a takeover by ideologically-driven investors. As if on cue, came news yesterday as journos were heading to the Empire that Canadian billionaire Jim Grenon had taken a nearly 10% stake in NZME and signalled his intention to rally support from other shareholders to sack the entire board of NZME.

As RNZ reported, “Grenon owns Calgary-based private equity firm TOM Group, and has interests in alternative local media outlet The Centrist and NZ Essential News (NZNE), which have run critical articles on vaccines, climate change, and identity politics.”

Digital disruption has made mainstream media outlets around the world vulnerable to takeover. Witness what is happening to the Washington Post, as its owner, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos stamps his mark on the paper’s editorial direction. Like taking the pressure off Russia on cybersecurity, the weakening of our key media outlets could end very badly for everyone involved.