At the seminar “ICT and Geopolitics” organized by EPITA in partnership with the EGE on March 24, the second round table conference brought together experts from the economic intelligence and information systems around reflections on the best strategies in the information war.
Is the defensive posture enough?
For Christian Harbulot, director of the Ecole de Guerre Economique (EGE), “we cannot ignore the assessment from the information war. However, as in any war, the one who attacks has the advantage over one who defends. On the other hand, an informational attack is much cheaper than industrial espionage and is much more relevant. So let’s not just address the problem through the defensive attitude, as we tend to do in France or in democracies in general who are struggling to view the attack as legitimate. “
The attack has several comparative advantages over the defense, as explains Etienne Drouard, lawyer and leader of the team “New technologies and intellectual property” at Morgan Lewis Law Firm: “the attack prevails on the defense by its priority in time and its relative speed. Being in defense is more complicated because the operation needs a lot of backing up. The immediate diagnosis of an attack involves several skills. “
Certainly, highlighting the advantages of the attack does not necessarily encourage the posture of the attacker, but at least reinforces the idea that we must take particular care to the defense. “The defense asks for a detailed analysis of risks, methodology and experience,” said Serge Saghrouni, head of the Security of Information Systems (RSIS) at Accor.
“The Right of Response”
However, from the moment we are under attack, the attack is legitimate, at least in the form of the response. The problem is mainly to successfully identify the origin of attacks. Serge Saghrouni explains: “To attack, you must know what to attack. Who are they, do they have a real desire? The means and interests, how to identify them? These are questions to be asked. “
The conclusion is scathing: “We must stop with the syndrome of the Maginot line and organize effective response capacity, conceptualize scenarios to prepare against possible attacks.” says Eric J. Delbecque, Head of “Department of Economic Security” at the “National Institute of Advanced Studies in Security and Justice” (INHESJ). If one believes in this unanimity in favor of the attack, the time to think on the subject has ended. There is nothing more but to take action.