Newly nasty: Defences against cyberwarfare are still rudimentary. That’s scary

Imagine that agents of a hostile power, working in conjunction with organised crime, could cause huge traffic jams in your country’s biggest cities — big enough to paralyse business, the media, government and public services, and to cut you off from the world. That would be seen as a grave risk to national security, surely?Yes — unless the attacks came over the internet. For most governments, defending their national security against cyberwarfare means keeping hackers out of important government computers. Much less thought has been given to the risks posed by large-scale disruption of the public internet. Modern life depends on it, yet it is open to all comers. That is why the world’s richest countries and their military planners are now studying intensively the attacks on Estonia that started four weeks ago, amid that country’s row with Russia about moving a Soviet-era war memorial.
http://economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9228757The Economist also has a list of the “Milestones in the history of information warfare”:
http://economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9228794