I'm a big fan of Bruce Schneier, and even had the privilege of meeting him back in the 90's at a conference. I believe he typically does an excellent job of pointing out which Emperors' new clothes happen to be non-existent. His recent commentary on the role of communications during the Mumbai Massacre, however, seems ill-informed. In particular, he says:
"Yes, there are specific movie-plot scenarios where certain public pronouncements might help the terrorists, but those are rare. I would much rather err on the side of more information, more openness, and more communication."
In principle I agree, but sadly the facts in Mumbai appear to be that the terrorists were free to watch the news while holed-up. From the details given in the news broadcasts they were able to learn where some folks were hiding and then proceeded to go there and murder them. The BBC and CNN both appear guilty of blowing peoples' hiding places.
As the terrorists' sophistication grows we should expect them to use and potentially monitor all communications capabilitites at their disposal, including Twitter, Flickr and others. It's important for everyone to realize that loose lips really can sink ships. Don't ever give out any information that can be used by the bad guys during an active event to increase the damage they're doing, as you're just aiding the enemy.
This isn't to say that different communications media should be shut down during an event, and that is probably the point that Bruce is trying to make, but it's also important to emphasize "operational security" and not reveal things that can get folks killed.
Comments