TEDxParis 2010
Guy-Philippe Goldstein: How cyberattacks threaten real-world peace
盖尔.菲力浦 戈斯坦 网络战争如何威胁现实世界的和平
Filmed:
Readability: 5.3
558,059 views
世界各国日渐受到网络攻击，这种对另一个国家的电脑系统的无声的打击，通常无迹可寻。（还记得蠕虫吗？）在TED巴黎会上，盖尔 菲力浦 戈斯坦展示了数码世界中的网络攻击是如何导致现实世界中的武力冲突，以及我们如何才能防止这一全球性的安全隐患。
Guy-Philippe Goldstein - Author
Guy-Philippe Goldstein is the author of Babel Minute Zero, a novel that examines the reality of cyberwar in our current geopolitical topography. Full bio
Guy-Philippe Goldstein is the author of Babel Minute Zero, a novel that examines the reality of cyberwar in our current geopolitical topography. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:15
Good afternoon.
0
0
1000
下午好
00:16
If you have followed
1
1000
2000
如果你关注
00:18
diplomatic news in the past weeks,
2
3000
2000
前几个星期的国际新闻，
00:20
you may have heard of a kind of crisis
3
5000
2000
你可能已经听说了
00:22
between China and the U.S.
4
7000
2000
中美之间的紧张关系
00:24
regarding cyberattacks
5
9000
2000
与网络攻击有关
00:26
against the American company Google.
6
11000
2000
受攻击的是美国的谷歌公司
00:28
Many things have been said about this.
7
13000
2000
众说纷纭
00:30
Some people have called a cyberwar
8
15000
2000
有人说这是网络战争
00:32
what may actually be
9
17000
2000
其实很可能只是
00:34
just a spy operation --
10
19000
2000
一个间谍活动
00:36
and obviously, a quite mishandled one.
11
21000
2000
而且很明显是一个失败的活动
00:38
However, this episode reveals
12
23000
3000
总之，这个事件说明了
00:41
the growing anxiety in the Western world
13
26000
2000
对于这些层出不穷的网络武器
00:43
regarding these emerging cyber weapons.
14
28000
3000
西方社会的担忧有增无减
00:46
It so happens that these weapons are dangerous.
15
31000
2000
这些武器很危险
00:48
They're of a new nature:
16
33000
2000
它们有个新的共性
00:50
they could lead the world
17
35000
2000
就是带给世界
00:52
into a digital conflict
18
37000
2000
数码冲突
00:54
that could turn into an armed struggle.
19
39000
2000
甚至能演变成真的武力冲突
00:56
These virtual weapons can also destroy the physical world.
20
41000
4000
这些虚拟的武器也能够摧毁真实的世界
01:01
In 1982, in the middle of the Cold War
21
46000
3000
一九八二年在冷战的中期
01:04
in Soviet Siberia,
22
49000
2000
西伯利亚
01:06
a pipeline exploded with a burst of 3 kilotons,
23
51000
4000
一条天然气管道爆炸，三千吨的爆炸量
01:10
the equivalent of a fourth of the Hiroshima bomb.
24
55000
2000
相当于四分之一广岛核弹的威力
01:12
Now we know today -- this was revealed
25
57000
2000
汤玛斯.瑞德是美国总统里根任期的美国空军部长
01:14
by Thomas Reed,
26
59000
2000
通过他的报道
01:16
Ronald Reagan's former U.S. Air Force Secretary --
27
61000
2000
我们得知
01:18
this explosion was actually the result
28
63000
3000
这次爆炸其实是
01:21
of a CIA sabotage operation,
29
66000
2000
美国中央情报局一次蓄意行动的结果
01:23
in which they had managed
30
68000
2000
他们想办法
01:25
to infiltrate the IT management systems
31
70000
2000
侵入了天然气管道的
01:27
of that pipeline.
32
72000
2000
计算机管理系统
01:29
More recently, the U.S. government revealed
33
74000
3000
最近，美国政府披露了
01:32
that in September 2008, more than 3 million people
34
77000
3000
在二零零八年九月，多过三百万人口
01:35
in the state of Espirito Santo in Brazil
35
80000
3000
在巴西圣埃斯皮里图州
01:38
were plunged into darkness,
36
83000
2000
经历的大规模停电
01:40
victims of a blackmail operation from cyber pirates.
37
85000
5000
也是网络黑客的杰作
01:45
Even more worrying for the Americans,
38
90000
2000
更令美国担忧的是
01:47
in December 2008 the holiest of holies,
39
92000
3000
二零零八年十二月
01:50
the IT systems of CENTCOM,
40
95000
2000
中央司令部的核心的电脑系统
01:52
the central command
41
97000
2000
负责对阿富汗和伊拉克战争
01:54
managing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,
42
99000
3000
进行中央控制的系统
01:57
may have been infiltrated by hackers
43
102000
2000
也被黑客侵入了
01:59
who used these:
44
104000
3000
他们使用的是
02:02
plain but infected USB keys.
45
107000
2000
看似空白但是已被感染的USB设备
02:04
And with these keys, they may have been able
46
109000
2000
通过这些USB设备，他们能
02:06
to get inside CENTCOM's systems,
47
111000
2000
进入中央控制系统里
02:08
to see and hear everything,
48
113000
2000
得到所有信息
02:10
and maybe even infect some of them.
49
115000
2000
甚至能够改变一些信息
02:12
As a result, the Americans take the threat very seriously.
50
117000
2000
结果是，美国对这些威胁反应很大
02:14
I'll quote General James Cartwright,
51
119000
2000
按照詹姆斯.卡特瑞特将军的说法
02:16
Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
52
121000
2000
他是参谋长联会的副主席
02:18
who says in a report to Congress
53
123000
2000
他在对国会的报告中说
02:20
that cyberattacks could be as powerful as
54
125000
3000
网络攻击具有
02:23
weapons of mass destruction.
55
128000
3000
和强大的武器一样的摧毁力量
02:26
Moreover, the Americans have decided
56
131000
2000
更进一步，美国政府决定
02:28
to spend over 30 billion dollars
57
133000
2000
在未来五年内
02:30
in the next five years
58
135000
1500
花三十亿美元
02:32
to build up their cyberwar capabilities.
59
136500
1500
来加强它们的网络力量
02:34
And across the world today, we see
60
139000
2000
放眼今天的世界
02:36
a sort of cyber arms race,
61
141000
3000
我们能看到关于网络武力的竞争
02:39
with cyberwar units
62
144000
2000
一些网络战争，
02:41
built up by countries like North Korea
63
146000
2000
从一些国家比如朝鲜
02:43
or even Iran.
64
148000
1000
或者伊朗
02:44
Yet, what you'll never hear
65
149000
2000
同时，从美国国防部
02:46
from spokespeople
66
151000
2000
或者法国国防部发言人的口中
02:48
from the Pentagon or the French Department of Defence
67
153000
3000
你绝对不会听到
02:51
is that the question isn't really
68
156000
2000
这个问题并非关于
02:53
who's the enemy, but actually
69
158000
2000
谁是敌人
02:55
the very nature of cyber weapons.
70
160000
3000
而是关于网络战争的特性
02:58
And to understand why, we must look at how,
71
163000
2000
要理解这一点，我们必须看看
03:00
through the ages, military technologies
72
165000
3000
这些年来，军事技术
03:03
have maintained or destroyed
73
168000
2000
是怎么维持，或者摧毁
03:05
world peace.
74
170000
2000
世界和平的
03:08
For example,
75
173000
2000
打个比方
03:10
if we'd had TEDxParis
76
175000
1000
假如我们在三百五十年前
03:11
350 years ago,
77
176000
2000
开这个TED巴黎会
03:13
we would have talked about the military innovation of the day --
78
178000
3000
我们可能会谈大规模沃邦式防御堡垒
03:16
the massive Vauban-style fortifications --
79
181000
3000
这样的军事创新
03:19
and we could have predicted
80
184000
2000
我们由此预测
03:21
a period of stability in the world or in Europe.
81
186000
3000
世界或欧洲会有一段和平时期
03:24
which was indeed the case in Europe
82
189000
3000
那段时期的情况也确实如此
03:27
between 1650 and 1750.
83
192000
2000
在1650年和1750年之间 欧洲确有一段和平时期
03:29
Similarly, if we'd had this talk
84
194000
3000
同样，如果我们
03:32
30 or 40 years ago, we would have seen
85
197000
3000
在三十或者四十年前，我们会看到
03:35
how the rise of nuclear weapons,
86
200000
2000
核武器的发展
03:37
and the threat of mutually assured destruction they imply,
87
202000
4000
和他们带来的相互威胁
03:41
prevents a direct fight between the two superpowers.
88
206000
3000
事实上防止了两个军事强国间的直接的战争
03:45
However, if we'd had this talk 60 years ago,
89
210000
2000
但是如果我们在六十年前谈这个
03:47
we would have seen how the emergence
90
212000
3000
我们会看到
03:50
of new aircraft and tank technologies,
91
215000
3000
新式飞机和坦克的技术
03:53
which give the advantage to the attacker,
92
218000
3000
这些技术给了进攻一方
03:56
make the Blitzkrieg doctrine very credible
93
221000
3000
很大的优势来进行闪电式攻击
03:59
and thus create the possibility of war in Europe.
94
224000
3000
从而给了欧洲大战的机会
04:02
So military technologies
95
227000
2000
所以军事技术
04:04
can influence the course of the world,
96
229000
2000
能够影响世界的秩序
04:06
can make or break world peace --
97
231000
2000
能够维持或者破坏世界的和平
04:08
and there lies the issue with cyber weapons.
98
233000
2000
网络武器也有这些问题
04:10
The first issue:
99
235000
2000
第一个问题是
04:12
Imagine a potential enemy announcing
100
237000
3000
想象如果一个可能的敌人宣布
04:15
they're building a cyberwar unit,
101
240000
2000
他们在制造一个网络战争的设备
04:17
but only for their country's defense.
102
242000
2000
但是仅仅用来防御
04:19
Okay, but what distinguishes it
103
244000
3000
但是这个设备又和
04:22
from an offensive unit?
104
247000
2000
进攻性的武器有什么区别呢？
04:24
It gets even more complicated
105
249000
2000
问题变得更加复杂
04:26
when the doctrines of use become ambiguous.
106
251000
4000
当我们没有一个对使用方法的规定
04:30
Just 3 years ago, both the U.S. and France
107
255000
4000
三年前，美国和法国
04:34
were saying they were investing militarily in cyberspace,
108
259000
4000
同时说它们在投资网络军事
04:38
strictly to defend their IT systems.
109
263000
2000
但是仅仅是为了防御
04:41
But today both countries say
110
266000
3000
但是今天，两个国家都说
04:44
the best defense is to attack.
111
269000
2000
最好的防御就是先攻击
04:46
And so, they're joining China,
112
271000
2000
就这样他们就像是中国
04:48
whose doctrine of use for 15 years has been
113
273000
4000
中国在过去的十五年来
04:52
both defensive and offensive.
114
277000
3000
用网络同时防御和进攻
04:55
The second issue:
115
280000
2000
第二个问题是
04:57
Your country could be under cyberattack
116
282000
4000
你的国家可能会被进攻
05:01
with entire regions plunged into total darkness,
117
286000
3000
从而整个区域断电
05:04
and you may not even know
118
289000
2000
你都不会知道
05:06
who's attacking you.
119
291000
2000
谁攻击了你
05:08
Cyber weapons have this peculiar feature:
120
293000
1800
网络武器有个特征
05:10
they can be used
121
294800
1500
使用网络武器
05:12
without leaving traces.
122
296300
1700
可以不留痕迹
05:13
This gives a tremendous advantage to the attacker,
123
298000
2000
这就给了进攻的人很大的优势
05:15
because the defender
124
300000
2000
因为防御者
05:17
doesn't know who to fight back against.
125
302000
2000
不知道怎么反攻
05:19
And if the defender retaliates against the wrong adversary,
126
304000
2000
如果防御者选错了反击对象
05:21
they risk making one more enemy
127
306000
3000
他们便面临再加一个敌人的危险
05:24
and ending up diplomatically isolated.
128
309000
2000
可能会被外交隔离起来
05:26
This issue isn't just theoretical.
129
311000
2000
这是个很现实的问题
05:28
In May 2007, Estonia was the victim of cyberattacks,
130
313000
2000
在二零零七年五月，爱沙尼亚受网络攻击
05:30
that damaged its communication
131
315000
3000
通信和银行系统
05:33
and banking systems.
132
318000
2000
受到了影响
05:35
Estonia accused Russia.
133
320000
2000
他们怀疑俄国
05:37
But NATO, though it defends Estonia,
134
322000
2000
但是北大西洋公约组织，虽然在维护爱沙尼亚
05:39
reacted very prudently. Why?
135
324000
2000
他们的反应还是很保守。为什么呢？
05:41
Because NATO couldn't be 100% sure
136
326000
2000
因为北大西洋公约组织也不能百分之百的确定
05:43
that the Kremlin was indeed behind these attacks.
137
328000
5000
到底是不是俄罗斯在背后搞鬼。
05:48
So to sum up, on the one hand,
138
333000
3000
总而言之，一方面
05:51
when a possible enemy announces
139
336000
2000
当可能的敌人宣布
05:53
they're building a cyberwar unit,
140
338000
2000
他们在建一个网络战争的设备时
05:55
you don't know whether it's for attack
141
340000
2000
你不知道这是为了进攻
05:57
or defense.
142
342000
1000
还是防御
05:58
On the other hand,
143
343000
1000
另一方面
05:59
we know that these weapons give an advantage to attacking.
144
344000
4000
我们知道这种武器是对进攻一方有利的
06:03
In a major article published in 1978,
145
348000
3000
在一九七八年发表的一篇论文中
06:06
Professor Robert Jervis of Columbia University in New York
146
351000
2000
纽约哥伦比亚大学的罗伯特 哲维斯教授
06:08
described a model to understand
147
353000
2000
描述了一个模型
06:10
how conflicts could arise.
148
355000
2000
来帮助理解就网络战争而言
06:12
In this context,
149
357000
3000
冲突是怎么产生的
06:15
when you don't know if the potential enemy
150
360000
2000
当你不知道敌人是在
06:17
is preparing for defense or attack,
151
362000
3000
准备防御还是进攻时
06:20
and if the weapons give an advantage to attacking,
152
365000
2000
如果这个武器是有利于进攻的
06:22
then this environment is
153
367000
2000
这个气氛就是
06:24
most likely to spark a conflict.
154
369000
4000
要起冲突了
06:28
This is the environment that's being created
155
373000
2000
这个环境是
06:30
by cyber weapons today,
156
375000
2000
今天网络武器创造的
06:32
and historically it was the environment in Europe
157
377000
3000
历史上这就是欧洲的环境
06:35
at the onset of World War I.
158
380000
4000
在一次大战开始的时候
06:39
So cyber weapons
159
384000
2000
所以网络武器
06:41
are dangerous by nature,
160
386000
2000
本质上是危险的
06:43
but in addition, they're emerging
161
388000
3000
但是另一方面，它们也
06:46
in a much more unstable environment.
162
391000
2000
是在一个很不稳定的环境下产生的
06:48
If you remember the Cold War,
163
393000
2000
如果你记得冷战时期
06:50
it was a very hard game,
164
395000
2000
那是个非常困难的游戏
06:52
but a stable one played only by two players,
165
397000
2000
但是是个稳定的游戏，仅仅是两方在对峙
06:54
which allowed for some coordination between the two superpowers.
166
399000
2000
这样两方之间就有一些调剂
06:57
Today we're moving to a multipolar world
167
402000
5000
今天我们来到了一个群雄逐鹿的世界
07:02
in which coordination is much more complicated,
168
407000
1000
想调剂变得很复杂
07:03
as we have seen at Copenhagen.
169
408000
3000
就像我们在哥本哈根所见
07:06
And this coordination may become even trickier
170
411000
3000
调剂会变得更加复杂
07:09
with the introduction of cyber weapons.
171
414000
3000
当我们有了网路武器
07:12
Why? Because no nation
172
417000
2000
为什么？因为没有一个国家
07:14
knows for sure whether its neighbor
173
419000
3000
能确定地知道它的邻居
07:17
is about to attack.
174
422000
2000
是不是将要进攻了
07:19
So nations may live under the threat
175
424000
2000
所以所有国家都活在危机中
07:21
of what Nobel Prize winner Thomas Schelling
176
426000
3000
正如诺贝尔奖得主汤玛斯.斯考林所说
07:24
called the "reciprocal fear of surprise attack,"
177
429000
2000
对突袭的相互恐惧
07:26
as I don't know if my neighbor
178
431000
2000
就像是我不知道我的邻居
07:28
is about to attack me or not --
179
433000
2000
会不会攻击我
07:30
I may never know --
180
435000
2000
我可能永远也不知道
07:32
so I might take the upper hand
181
437000
2000
所以我就先下手为强
07:34
and attack first.
182
439000
3000
抢先进攻
07:37
Just last week,
183
442000
2000
就在上一周
07:39
in a New York Times article dated January 26, 2010,
184
444000
4000
纽约时报在2010年1月26号
07:43
it was revealed for the first time that
185
448000
2000
独家报道了
07:45
officials at the National Security Agency
186
450000
3000
国家安全局的高层
07:48
were considering the possibility of preemptive attacks
187
453000
4000
考虑了抢先进攻的可能
07:52
in cases where the U.S. was about
188
457000
3000
以防万一美国
07:55
to be cyberattacked.
189
460000
3000
遭到攻击
07:58
And these preemptive attacks
190
463000
2000
这些抢先进攻
08:00
might not just remain
191
465000
1000
可能不仅仅局限在
08:01
in cyberspace.
192
466000
3000
在网络世界里
08:05
In May 2009, General Kevin Chilton,
193
470000
5000
在2009年5月，凯文.切尔顿将军
08:10
commander of the U.S. nuclear forces,
194
475000
3000
美国核武力的指挥官
08:13
stated that in the event of cyberattacks against the U.S.,
195
478000
5000
宣布如果美国受网络攻击
08:18
all options would be on the table.
196
483000
3000
美国可能会采取任何应对行动
08:21
Cyber weapons do not replace
197
486000
2000
网络攻击不能取代
08:23
conventional or nuclear weapons --
198
488000
2000
传统武器或者是核武器
08:25
they just add a new layer to the existing system of terror.
199
490000
5000
它们在已有的危险上另加了一层
08:30
But in doing so, they also add their own risk
200
495000
3000
但是就这样，它们同时也加了一层危险
08:33
of triggering a conflict --
201
498000
2000
可能会激发冲突
08:35
as we've just seen, a very important risk --
202
500000
2000
我们已经看到过了，非常大的危险
08:37
and a risk we may have to confront
203
502000
2000
我们可能得要
08:39
with a collective security solution
204
504000
3000
用集体的安全网
08:42
which includes all of us:
205
507000
2000
来对付这个危险
08:44
European allies, NATO members,
206
509000
2000
包括欧洲盟友，北大西洋公约组织的成员
08:46
our American friends and allies,
207
511000
2000
我们的美国朋友和盟友
08:48
our other Western allies,
208
513000
2000
其他的西方盟友
08:50
and maybe, by forcing their hand a little,
209
515000
2000
甚至，可能要加点压力
08:52
our Russian and Chinese partners.
210
517000
3000
给我们的俄国和中国伙伴
08:55
The information technologies
211
520000
2000
那些乔.德.如斯纳所说的
08:57
Joël de Rosnay was talking about,
212
522000
1500
信息技术
08:59
which were historically born from military research,
213
523500
2500
历史上从军事研究中发展出来的
09:01
are today on the verge of developing
214
526000
2000
今天开始有了
09:03
an offensive capability of destruction,
215
528000
3000
摧毁的力量
09:06
which could tomorrow, if we're not careful,
216
531000
4000
未来，我们一不小心
09:10
completely destroy world peace.
217
535000
3000
就可能会毁灭整个世界
09:13
Thank you.
218
538000
2000
谢谢大家
09:15
(Applause)
219
540000
3000
（掌声）
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Guy-Philippe Goldstein - AuthorGuy-Philippe Goldstein is the author of Babel Minute Zero, a novel that examines the reality of cyberwar in our current geopolitical topography.
Why you should listen
By day, Guy-Philippe Goldstein is a management consultant. At night, he writes gripping political thrillers treating of cyberwar. He's a graduate of France’s prestigious Hautes Études Commerciales, and has an MBA from Northwestern University. Babel Minute Zero is his first novel.
Guy-Philippe Goldstein | Speaker | TED.com