Conference 2010 Lookahead | Tuesday 21 September

The who, when and where of the Lib Dem conference.

Look out for

Simon Hughes, deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats, will be speaking at 12:20. His appearance will be of particular interest to the media, owing to his status as the Lib Dems' most outspoken internal critic.

However, as Olly Grender pointed out in an update from the conference yesterday evening, the signs so far are that the "Simon-watchers" are going to be disappointed. In his fringe appearances, Hughes has refrained from overt criticism of the coalition, secure in the knowledge that one iota of perceived dissent could dominate headlines for days.

Nevertheless, Hughes' speech today will be worth watching, if only to see how he treads the line between offering support to his now-ministerial colleagues and while still addressing the misgivings of his audience.

Signs of trouble?

A policy motion this morning entitled "Ensuring Fairness in a Time of Austerity" should prompt some lively debate. James Graham, founder of the Social Liberal Forum, is to propose the motion, which seeks to ensure that "those with the broadest shoulders carry the greatest burden" during economically straightened times. But with the VAT rise and welfare cuts on the horizon, quite how this goal will be achieved remains to be seen. An amendment has also been tabled on the hot topic of "progressive cuts" -- it will be interesting to see how far delegates are prepared to defend their coalition partners' proposals.

On the fringe

Following on from yesterday's controversy over the Free Schools policy motion, the New Statesman is hosting a fringe event on this very subject: Will schools have too much freedom in a "big society"? Duncan Hames MP and Russell Hobby, General Secretary, National Association of Head Teachers, join the New Statesman's Spencer Neal for the debate. More details here.

Conference timetable

09:00 - 09:55 Policy Motion: Localism

09:55 - 10:15 Speech: Lord McNally

10:15 - 11:20 Policy Motion: Ensuring Fairness in a Time of Austerity

11:20 - 12:20 Policy Motion: Equal Marriage in United Kingdom

12:20 - 12:40 Speech: Simon Hughes MP

14:30 - 15:15 Question and Answer Session: Public Services and Benefits

15:15 - 15:35 Speech: Chris Huhne MP

15:35 - 16:05 Emergency Motion: Pakistan Floods

16:05 - 16:35 Topical Issue: Building A Low Carbon Economy

16:35 - 16:55 Presentation: Liberal Democrat Group on Fife Council

16:55 - 17:35 Reports: Parliamentary Parties of the Liberal Democrats

17:35 - 18:00 Constitutional Amendment: Election of Local Authority Councillors to Federal Committees, Constitutional Amendment: Substitution for the Leader on the Federal Policy Committee

Full conference timetable here.

Caroline Crampton is web editor of the New Statesman.

Show Hide image

Can Trident be hacked?

A former defence secretary has warned that Trident is vulnerable to cyber attacks. Is it?

What if, in the event of a destructive nuclear war, the prime minister goes to press the red button and it just doesn't work? 

This was the question raised by Des Browne, a former defence secretary, in an interview witht the Guardian this week. His argument, based on a report from the defence science board of the US Department of Defense, is that the UK's Trident nuclear weapons could be vulnerable to cyberattacks, and therefore rendered useless if hacked. 

Browne called for an "end-to-end" assessment of the system's cybersecurity: 

 The government ... have an obligation to assure parliament that all of the systems of the nuclear deterrent have been assessed end-to-end against cyber attacks to understand possible weak spots and that those weak spots are protected against a high-tier cyber threat. If they are unable to do that then there is no guarantee that we will have a reliable deterrent or the prime minister will be able to use this system when he needs to reach for it.

Is he right? Should we really be worried about Trident's potential cyber weaknesses?

Tangled webs 

The first, crucial thing to note is that Trident is not connected to the "internet" we use every day. Sure, it's connected to the main Ministry of Defence network, but this operates totally independently of the network that you visit Facebook through. In cyber-security terms, this means the network is "air-gapped" - it's isolated from other systems that could be less secure. 

In our minds, Trident is old and needs replacing (the submarines began patrolling in the 1990s), but any strike would be ordered and co-ordinated from Northwood, a military bunker 100m underground which would use the same modern networks as the rest of the MoD. Trident is basically as secure as the rest of the MoD. 

What the MoD said

I asked the Ministry of Defence for a statement on Trident's security, and while it obviously can't offer much information about how it all actually works, a spokesperson confirmed that the system is air-gapped and added: 

We wouldn't comment on the detail of our security arrangements for the nuclear deterrent but we can and do safeguard it from all threats including cyber.

What security experts said

Security experts agree that an air-gapped system tends to be more secure than one connected to the internet. Sean Sullivan, a security adviser at F-secure, told Infosecurity magazine that while some hackers have been able to "jump" air-gaps using code, this would cause "interference" at most and a major attack of this kind is still "a long way off". 

Franklin Miller, a former White House defence policy offer, told the Guardian that the original report cited by Browne was actually formulated in response to suggestions that some US defence networks should be connected to the internet. In that case, it actually represents an argument in favour of the type of air-gapped system used by the MoD. 

So... can it be hacked?

The answer is really that any system could be hacked, but a specialised, independent defence network is very, very unlikely to be. If a successful hack did happen, it would likely affect all aspects of defence, not just Trident. That doesn't mean that every effort shouldn't be made to make sure the MoD is using the most secure system possible, but it also means that scaremongering in the context of other, unrelated cybersecurity scares is a little unjustified. 

Barbara Speed is a technology and digital culture writer at the New Statesman and a staff writer at CityMetric.