Analysis of Weinbergers Concepts of Cyberwarfare

Analysis of Weinbergers Concepts of Cyberwarfare In June 2010, analysts from the antivirus software company VirusBlokAda examined a computer in Iran due to suspicion of malware activity. Lurking inside the machine was a computer worm known as Stuxnet. Stuxnet possessed an array of abilities, among them was the ability to target the software that controls pumps, valves, generators and other industrial machines (Weinberger, 2011). Unlike other viruses that use forged security clearances to gain access into systems, Stuxnet took advantage of two digital certificates of authenticity stolen from respected companies (Weinberger, 2011). Furthermore, it exploited four different zero day vulnerabilities' which are security gaps that system creators were unaware of (Weinberger, 2011). According to Liam O Murchu, chief of security response of Symantec, once Stuxnet infected a system, the crucial parts of its executable code would become active only if that machine was also running Siemens Step 7, one of the many supervisory control and data (SCADA) systems used to manage industrial processes (Weinberger, 2011). Symantec also discovered that the majority of infections were in Iran and that the infections seemed to have been appearing there in waves since 2009 (Weinberger, 2011). Further investigation performed by Ralph Langner, a control-system security consultant, resulted in evidence that Stuxnet had been deliberately directed against Iran, the most likely target being Irans Nuclear Enrichment Facility in Natanz. (Weinberger, 2011). According to Langner, Stuxnet was designed to alter the speed of the delicate centrifuges which separated Irans rare but fissionable isotope uranium -235 from the heavier uranium -238 (Weinberger, 2011). Improper alteration of the cent rifuges could result in them spinning out of control and breaking. Although the Iranian Government refuses to admit that Stuxnet was responsible for the destruction of many centrifuges at Natanz, the results from Langner and others is credited by reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency. The IAEA documented a precipitous drop in the number of operating centrifuges in 2009, the year that many observers think Stuxnet infected computers in Iran (Weinberger, 2011). There is no evidence beyond rumor that Israel or the US Government may have been behind the attack. Symantec notes that a name embedded in Stuxnets code, Myrtus, could be a reference to a biblical story about a planned massacre of Jews in Persia (Weinberger, 2011). Moreover, Langner believes that the U.S. Government could have been behind the attack considering they possess both the required expertise in cyber warfare and a long-standing goal of thwarting Irans nuclear ambitions (Weinberger, 2011). Irrespective of Stuxnets creator, the main growing fear is who will redesign it. Stuxnet was the first weapon created entirely out of code and proved that groups or nations could launch a cyber-attack against a societys vital infrastructures (Weinberger, 2011). Many of the investigators that studied Stuxnet concluded that it essentially laid out a blueprint for future attackers to learn from and perhaps improve (Weinberger, 2011). Stuxnet opened a new era of warfare and with its code available online for anyone to study and improve, it has computer scientists like Yuval Elovici concerned that the next wave of cyber-attacks would be much stronger than the impact of setting several atomic bombs on major cities (Weinberger, 2011). In IS THIS THE START OF CYBERWARFARE? Sharon Weinberger questions whether or not Stuxnet started a new era of warfare. One might find that Weinbergers use of supporting evidence from many credible sources imposes a compelling answer to an interesting topic of study. Weinberger emphasizes the inferred answer is indeed yes, Stuxnet introduced a new era of warfare. Statements such as Stuxnet is the harbinger of a new generation of cyber threats and that it provided chilling proof that groups or nations could launch a cyber-attack against a societys vital infrastructures are well validated by the many investigators that studied it (Weinberger, 2011). Overall, one would appreciate Weinbergers supportive writing style and the information she presented in this article. Weinberger was heavily resourceful and made certain that every point she made was reinforced by credible supporting evidence. Furthermore, one would relish how she tailored her article to a broader audience. Easy and straightforward for a non tech-savvy individual to understand, and yet interesting to captivate the minds of those that are tech-savvy, she capitalized on the statements made from some of the most respected cyber security experts in the world. As a student who often finds himself being the rescue to many of his friends or familys infected PCs, choosing Stuxnet as my topic of study seemed like the obvious choice. I have always been very interested in computer malware since the day my laptop first got infected. I was bombarded with annoying ads telling me that I had a virus on board and that I needed to type in my credit card number to purchase antivirus protection. Although very annoying, it had me asking myself many questions like how did this happen, isnt Windows secure and best of all how do I delete my browsing history. Since then, I have always had a keen interest in malware and have developed a hobby of testing the capabilities of different antivirus programs in VMware Player. I find many things interesting about Stuxnet but the thing I find most interesting is how it spread. Although Stuxnet possessed the ability to spread through networks, it couldnt infect industrial control systems via the internet since a majority of them lack internet connectivity to protect them from malware and hostile takeover. (Weinberger, 2011). To get past this obstacle, Stuxnet had the ability to covertly install itself on a USB drive (Weinberger, 2011). Like a biological virus, Stuxnet used humans (plant operators specifically) as its host of transmission. If one careless plant operator were to plug in an infected USB flash drive into a control-system computer, Stuxnet would begin its destruction.   Weinberger, S. (2011, June 9). IS THIS THE START OF CYBERWARFARE? Nature, 142-145. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.uproxy.library.dc-uoit.ca/docview/872363390?accountid=14694 Last years Stuxnet virus attack represented a new kind of threat to critical infrastructure. Just over a year ago, a computer in Iran started repeatedly rebooting itself, seemingly without reason. Suspecting some kind of malicious software (malware), analysts at VirusBlokAda, an antivirus-software company in Minsk, examined the misbehaving machine over the Internet, and soon found that they were right. Disturbingly so: the code they extracted from the Iranian machine proved to be a previously unknown computer virus of unprecedented size and complexity. On 17 June 2010, VirusBlokAda issued a worldwide alert that set off an international race to track down what came to be known as Stuxnet: the most sophisticated computer malware yet found and the harbinger of a new generation of cyberthreats. Unlike conventional malware, which does its damage only in the virtual world of computers and networks, Stuxnet would turn out to target the software that controls pumps, valves, generators and other industrial machines. It was the first time wed analysed a threat that could cause real-world damage, that could actually cause some machine to break, that might be able to cause an explosion, says Liam O Murchu, chief of security response for the worlds largest computer-security firm, Symantec in Mountain View, California. Stuxnet provided chilling proof that groups or nations could launch a cyberattack against a societys vital infrastructures for water and energy. We are probably just now entering the era of the cyber arms race, says Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer for F-Secure, an antivirus company based in Helsinki. Worse yet, the Stuxnet episode has highlighted just how inadequate are societys current defences and how glaring is the gap in cybersecurity science. Computer-security firms are competitive in the marketplace, but they generally respond to a threat such as Stuxnet with close collaboration behind the scenes. Soon after Virus- BlokAdas alert, for example, Kaspersky Lab in Moscow was working with Microsoft in Redmond, Washington, to hunt down the vulnerabilities that the virus was exploiting in the Windows operating system. (It was Microsoft that coined the name Stuxnet, after one of the files hidden in its code. Technically, Stuxnet was a worm, a type of malware that can operate on its own without needing another program to infect. But even experts often call it a virus, which has become the generic term for self-replicating malware.) One of the most ambitious and comprehensive responses was led by Symantec, which kept O Murchu and his worldwide team of experts working on Stuxnet around the clock for three months. One major centre of operations was Symantecs malware lab in Culver City, California, which operates like the digital equivalent of a top-level biological containment facility. A sign on the door warns visitors to leave computers, USB flash drives and smart phones outside: any electronic device that passes through that door, even by mistake, will stay there. Inside the lab, the team began by dropping Stuxnet into a simulated networking environment so that they could safely watch what it did. The sheer size of the virus was staggering: some 15,000 lines of code, representing an estimated 10,000 person hours in software development. Compared with any other virus ever seen, says O Murchu, its a huge amount of code. Equally striking was the sophistication of that code. Stuxnet took advantage of two digital certificates of authenticity stolen from respected companies, and exploited four different zero day vulnerabilities previously unidentified security holes in Windows that were wide open for hackers to use. Then there was the viruss behaviour. Very quickly we realized that it was doing something very unusual, recalls O Murchu. Most notably, Stuxnet was trying to talk to the programmable logic controllers (PLCs) that are used to direct industrial machinery. Stuxnet was very selective, however: although the virus could spread to almost any machine running Windows, the crucial parts of its executable code would become active only if that machine was also running Siemens Step7, one of the many supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems used to manage industrial processes. Many industrial control systems are never connected to the Internet, precisely to protect them from malware and hostile takeover. That led to another aspect of Stuxnets sophistication. Like most other malware, it could spread over a network. But it could also covertly install itself on a USB drive. So all it would take was one operator unknowingly plugging an infected memory stick into a control-system computer, and the virus could explode into action. 6.1 Murky Motives It still wasnt clear what Stuxnet was supposed to do to the Siemens software. The Symantec team got a clue when it realized that the virus was gathering information about the host computers it had infected, and sending the data back to servers in Malaysia and Denmark presumably to give the unknown perpetrators a way to update the Stuxnet virus covertly. Identifying the command and control servers didnt allow Symantec to identify the perpetrators, but they were able to convince the Internet service providers to cut off the perpetrators access, rerouting the traffic from the infected computers back to Symantec so that they could eavesdrop. By watching where the traffic to the servers was coming from, O Murchu says, we were able to see that the majority of infections were in Iran at least 60% of them. In fact, the infections seemed to have been appearing there in waves since 2009. The obvious inference was that the virus had deliberately been directed against Iran, for reasons as yet unknown. But the Symantec investigators couldnt go much further by themselves. They were extremely knowledgeable about computers and networking, but like most malware-protection teams, they had little or no expertise in PLCs or SCADA systems. At some point in their analysis they just couldnt make any more sense out of what the purpose of this thing was, because they were not able to experiment with the virus in such a lab environment, says Ralph Langner, a control-system security consultant in Hamburg, Germany. Langner independently took it upon himself to fill that gap. Over the summer, he and his team began running Stuxnet in a lab environment equipped with Siemens software and industrial control systems, and watching how the virus interacted with PLCs. We began to see very strange and funny results immediately, and I mean by that within the first day of our lab experiment, he says. Those PLC results allowed Langner to infer that Stuxnet was a directed attack, seeking out specific software and hardware. In mid-September 2010, he announced on his blog that the evidence supported the suspicion that Stuxnet had been deliberately directed against Iran. The most likely target, he then believed, was the Bushehr nuclear power plant. 6.2 Industrial Sabotoge Speculative though Langners statements were, the news media quickly picked up on them and spread the word of a targeted cyberweapon. Over the next few months, however, as Langner and others continued to work with the code, the evidence began to point away from Bushehr and towards a uranium-enrichment facility in Natanz, where thousands of centrifuges were separating the rare but fissionable isotope uranium-235 from the heavier uranium-238. Many Western nations believe that this enrichment effort, which ostensibly provides fuel for nuclear power stations, is actually aimed at producing a nuclear weapon. The malware code, according to Langner and others, was designed to alter the speed of the delicate centrifuges, essentially causing the machines to spin out of control and break. That interpretation is given credence by reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna, which document a precipitous drop in the number of operating centrifuges in 2009, the year that many observers think Stuxnet first infected computers in Iran. True, the evidence is circumstantial at best. We dont know what those machines were doing when they werent in operation, cautions Ivanka Barszashka, a Bulgarian physicist who studied Iranian centrifuge performance while she was working with the Federation of American Scientists in Washington DC. We dont know if they were actually broken or if they were just sitting there. Moreover, the Iranian government has officially denied that Stuxnet destroyed large numbers of centrifuges at Natanz, although it does acknowledge that the infection is widespread in the country. And IAEA inspection reports from late 2010 make it clear that any damage was at most a temporary setback: Irans enrichment capacity is higher than ever. However, if Natanz was the target, that does suggest an answer to the mystery of who created Stuxnet, and why. Given the knowledge required including expertise in malware, industrial security and the specific types and configurations of the industrial equipment being targeted most Stuxnet investigators concluded early on that the perpetrators were backed by a government. Governments have tried to sabotage foreign nuclear programmes before, says Olli Heinonen, a senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and former deputy director-general of the IAEA. In the 1980s and 1990s, for example, Western governments orchestrated a campaign to inject faulty parts into the network that Pakistan used to supply nuclear technology to countries such as Iran and North Korea. Intelligence agencies, including the US Central Intelligence Agency, have also made other attempts to sell flawed nuclear designs to would-be proliferators. Stuxnet, says Heinonen, is another way to do the same thing. Langner argues that the government behind Stuxnet is that of the United States, which has both the required expertise in cyberwarfare and a long-standing goal of thwarting Irans nuclear ambitions. Throughout the summer of 2010, while Langner, Symantec and all the other investigators were vigorously trading ideas and information about Stuxnet, the US Department of Homeland Security maintained a puzzling silence, even though it operates Computer Emergency Readiness Teams (CERTs) created specifically to address cyberthreats. True, the CERT at the Idaho National Laboratory outside Idaho Falls, which operates one of the worlds most sophisticated testbeds for industrial control systems, did issue a series of alerts. But the first, on 20 July 2010, came more than a month after the initial warning from Belarus and contained nothing new. Later alerts followed the same pattern: too little, too late. A delayed clipping service, said Dale Peterson, founder of Digital Bond, a SCADA security firm in Sunrise, Florida, on his blog. There is no way that they could have missed this problem, or that this is all a misunderstanding. Thats just not possible, says Langner, who believes that the Idaho labs anaemic response was deliberate, intended to cover up the fact that Stuxnet had been created there. But even Langner has to admit that the evidence against the United States is purely circumstantial. (The US government itself will neither confirm nor deny the allegation, as is its practice for any discussion of covert activity.) And the evidence against the other frequently mentioned suspect, Israel, is even more so. Symantec, for example, points out that a name embedded in Stuxnets code, Myrtus, could be a reference to a biblical story about a planned massacre of Jews in Persia. But other investigators say that such claims are beyond tenuous. There are no facts about Israel, declares Jeffrey Carr, founder and chief executive of Taia Global, a cybersecurity consulting company in Tysons Corner, Virginia. 6.3 The Aftermath The who? may never be discovered. Active investigation of Stuxnet effectively came to an end in February 2011, when Symantec posted a final update to its definitive report on the virus, including key details about its execution, lines of attack and spread over time. Microsoft had long since patched the security holes that Stuxnet exploited, and all the antivirus companies had updated their customers digital immune systems with the ability to recognize and shut down Stuxnet on sight. New infections are now rare although they do still occur, and it will take years before all the computers with access to Siemens controllers are patched. If Stuxnet itself has ceased to be a serious threat, however, cybersecurity experts continue to worry about the larger vulnerabilities that it exposed. Stuxnet essentially laid out a blueprint for future attackers to learn from and perhaps improve, say many of the investigators who have studied it. In a way, you did open the Pandoras box by launching this attack, says Langner of his suspicions about the United States. And it might turn back to you guys eventually. Cybersecurity experts are ill-prepared for the threat, in part because they lack ties to the people who understand industrial control systems. Weve got actually two very different worlds that traditionally have not communicated all that much, says Eric Byres, co-founder and chief technology officer of Tofino Industrial Security in Lantzville, Canada. He applauds Symantec, Langner and others for reaching across that divide. But the effort required to make those connections substantially delayed the investigation. The divide extends into university computer-science departments, say Byres, himself an ex-academic. Researchers tend to look at industrial-control security as a technical problem, rather than an issue requiring serious scientific attention, he says. So when graduate students express interest in looking at, say, cryptography and industrial controls, they are told that the subject is not mathematically challenging enough for a dissertation project. Im not aware of any academic researchers who have invested significantly in the study of Stuxnet, agrees Andrew Ginter, director of industrial security for the North American group of Waterfall Security Solutions, based in Tel Aviv, Israel. Almost the only researchers doing that kind of work are in industrial or government settings among them a team at the Idaho National Laboratory working on a next-generation system called Sophia, which tries to protect industrial control systems against Stuxnet-like threats by detecting anomalies in the network. One barrier for academics working on cybersecurity is access to the malware that they must protect against. That was not such a problem for Stuxnet itself, because its code was posted on the web shortly after it was first identified. But in general, the careful safeguards that Symantec and other companies put in place in secure labs to protect the escape of malware may also inadvertently be a barrier for researchers who need to study them. If youre doing research into biological agents, its limited groups that have them and they are largely unwilling to share; the same holds true for malware, says Anup Ghosh, chief scientist at the Center for Secure Information Systems at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. To advance the field, researchers need access to good data sets, says Ghosh, who was once a programme manager at the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and is now working on a malware detector designed to identify viruses on the basis of how they behave, rathe r than on specific patterns in their code, known as signatures. Academic researchers are also inhibited by a certain squeamishness about digital weaponry, according to Herb Lin, chief scientist at the Computer Science and Telecommunications Board of the US National Research Council in Washington DC. He points out that to understand how to guard against cyberattacks, it may help to know how to commit them. Yet teaching graduate students to write malware is very controversial, he says. People say, What do you mean: youre training hackers?' 6.4 Preparing for the Next Attack A study last year by the JASON group, which advises the US government on science and technology matters, including defence, found broad challenges for cybersecurity (JASON Science of Cyber-Security; MITRE Corporation, 2010). Perhaps most important was its conclusion that the field was underdeveloped in reporting experimental results, and consequently in the ability to use them. Roy Maxion, a computer scientist at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, who briefed JASON, goes further, saying that cybersecurity suffers from a lack of scientific rigour. Medical professionals over the past 200 years transformed themselves from purveyors of leeches to modern scientists with the advent of evidence-based medicine, he notes. In computer science and in computer security in particular, that train is nowhere in sight. Computer science has developed largely as a collection of what Maxion calls clever parlour tricks. For example, at one conference, the leading paper showed how researchers could read computer screens by looking at the reflections off windows and other objects. From a practical point of view, anyone in a classified meeting would go, pooh, he says. In places where they dont want you to know [whats on the computer screen], there are no windows. Yet, that was the buzz that year. Maxion sees an urgent need for computer-science and security curricula to include courses in traditional research methods, such as experimental design and statistics none of which is currently required. Why does it matter? he asks. Because we dont have a scientific basis for investigating phenomena like Stuxnet, or the kind of defences that would be effective against it. Also troubling for many of the Stuxnet investigators was the US governments lacklustre response to the virus (assuming that it was not the perpetrator). Stuxnet represents a new generation of cyberweapon that could be turned against US targets, but there is no evidence that the government is making the obvious preparations for such an attack for example, plans for a coordinated response that pools resources from academia, research institutes and private business. Other countries seem to be taking the threat more seriously. Some of Chinas universities and vocational colleges have reportedly forged strong connections with the military to work on cybersecurity, for example. And Israel also seems to be exploiting its computing expertise for national security. A few months before the discovery of Stuxnet, Yuval Elovici, a computer scientist and director of Deutsche Telekom Laboratories at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Beersheba, Israel, told Nature that he was working closely with the countrys Ministry of Defense on cybersecurity. He presciently warned that the next wave of cyberattacks would be aimed at physical infrastructures. What would happen if there were a code injection into SCADA? What if someone would activate it suddenly? Elovici asked. He and other experts have been warning for several years now that such an attack on SCADA systems controlling the electricity grid could spark nationwide blackouts, or that the safety systems of power plants could be overridden, causing a shutdown or a serious accident. Similar disruptions could hit water and sewage systems, or even food processing plants. Such attacks, Elovici warned, are both realistic and underestimated. Asked how bad one would be, Elovici was unequivocal. I think, he said, it would be much stronger than the impact of setting several atomic bombs on major cities.

Green Alliances: McDonalds and Environmental Defense Essay -- Environm

Green Alliances: McDonalds and Environmental Defense On August 1, 1990, Shelby Yastrow, McDonald’s Senior Vice President of Environmental Affairs, and Fred Krupp, Environmental Defense’s Executive Director, announced that the company and the organization would form a partnership with the goal of improving waste management at McDonald’s. The announcement came as a surprise to many outside of McDonald’s and Environmental Defense; the alliance of the world’s largest fast-food company with one of the country’s oldest and best-known environmental organizations seemed improbable. McDonald’s seemed a more likely target for Environmental Defense’s litigation than a potential partner. Reaction to the announcement was mixed. Many, such as the Wall Street Journal, applauded the decision to cooperation, saying that the alliance could â€Å"break ground in the fight to protect the environment.†[1] Others, such as Warren T. Brooks of the San Francisco Chronicle, accused McDonaldâ₠¬â„¢s of caving into pressure from the â€Å"elitist yuppies†[2] of Environmental Defense. Still others, like Hans Schuttle of the Boston Globe, feared that Environmental Defense was catering to big business and â€Å"watering down† its stands.[3] McDonald’s and Environmental Defense themselves seemed unsure of the direction the partnership would take. Krupp spoke of â€Å"work[ing] together to improve the environment,† but also cautioned, â€Å"we’re always ready to roll out the heavy artillery.† Yastrow likewise expressed cautious optimism about the partnership. In this, Krupp and Yastrow were acknowledging McDonald’s and Environmental Defense’s very different histories and perspectives, yet they were also implying that each had evolved enough to a point where they were in a posit... ...26] www.environmentaldefense.org/pubs/Reports/McDfinreport.html, updated 8/21/00, accessed 11/16/00. [27] www.environmentaldefense.org/pubs/Reports/McDfinreport.html, updated 8/21/00, accessed 11/16/00. [28] www.environmentaldefense.org/pubs/Reports/McDfinreport.html, updated 8/21/00, accessed 11/16/00. [29] Langert, 12/4/00. [30] www.environmentaldefense.org/pubs/EDF-Letter/1991/Jan/a_mcdonalds.html, accessed 11/16/00. [31] Livesey, p. 5 [32] Livesey, p. 11 [33] Langert, 12/4/00. [34] www.environmentaldefense.org/pubs/StrategicPlan/, accessed 12/7/00. [35] www.environmentaldefense.org/pubs/Newsletter/1999/Dec/gc_ways.html, accessed 11/23/00. [36] National Resources Defense Council website, www.nrdc.org/cities/recycling/append.asp, accessed 11/14/00. [37] www.environmentaldefense.org/pubs/Reports/launchethic.html, accessed 11/23/00.

Military of Ancient Egypt: Warfare

Egypt’s military holds as much interest and rich history as other studies of the ancient era. The world’s first armies are known for the invention and spread of agriculture coupled with the domestication of animals in the fifth millennium, of which set the stage for the emergence of the first large-scale, complex urban societies around 4000 B. C. (Gabriel & Metz, 1991). Within five hundred years, the stone tools and weapons used by the ancient Egyptian military evolved to bronze of which its manufacture marked a warfare revolution. Birth of warfare was possible as Egyptian societies emerged in complexity and with fully articulated social structures that provided stability and legitimacy to new social roles and behaviors. Ancient Egyptian urban societies experienced a revolution in social structures that rested upon the new economic base and was most important to the emergence of war. Gabriel & Metz (1991) credit the conduct of war as a legitimate social function supported by an extensive institutional infrastructure, noted by the authors as a â€Å"mechanism of cultural development† (p. 3). Warfare was an indispensable function of the social order in ancient Egypt in order for people were to survive the predatory behavior of others. During the fourth millennium in Egypt, a range of social, political, economic, psychological, and military technologies emerged. The purpose of the emergence was to make the conduct of war a normal part of social existence. Egypt evolved from a state in which warfare was rare and typically ritualistic to one in which death and destruction were achieved on a modern scale. During this same period, warfare assumed great proportions in the size of the armies involved, the administrative mechanisms needed to sustain them, the development of weapons, the frequency of occurrence, and the scope of destruction achievable by military force (Gabriel & Metz, 1991). This marked the fully emergence of the one of the world’s first armies. According to studies by Dollinger (2000), the use of bronze weapons (referenced earlier) is believed to have originated during the Middle Kingdom. Dollinger believes â€Å"bronze Middle Kingdom arrowheads may have been imported from the Middle East† and further explains the production and manufacture of bronze in Egypt â€Å"became common only in the time of the 18th dynasty† (para 1). Egypt’s dependence on other areas for production and import of weapons put it at a disadvantage compared to the rising empires of the east during the first millennium BCE. Furthermore, Dollinger asserts that copper and bronze casting and hammering may have been developed by the Egyptians themselves (para 2). The production and manufacture of weapons was handled in armories where the complete weaponry was also stored. â€Å"When his majesty took action against the Asiatic sand-dwellers, his majesty made an army of many tens of thousands from all of Upper Egypt: †¦; from Lower Egypt: †¦; and from Irtjet-Nubians, Medja-Nubians, Yam-Nubians, Wawat-Nubians, Kaau-Nubians; and from Tjemeh-land.† (The Autobiography of Weni; Lichtheim M, Ancient Egyptian Literature Vol.1, p. 19) Prior to the conquest of Lower Egypt by the Hyksos, the majority of all conflicts the Egyptians fought had been civil wars (Dollginer, 2000; Schulman, 1964). The armies, predominately handled via draft led by noblemen, were comprised peasants and artisans. It was during the period of the Old Kingdom that foreigners were incorporated into the army. Historians, including Dollinger (2000), believe the Egyptians may have signed contracts with foreign potentates to insure the supply of mercenaries. As the Egyptian army evolved, old traditions became obsolete, making it easier for advancement. In fact, many army commanders reached kingship. Such notable kings include Horemheb and Ramses I (XIX Dynasty). Many of the new kings â€Å"surrounded themselves with former soldiers whose loyalty and self-sacrifice they had experienced† (Dollinger, 2000). One soldier was Didu, a professional soldier appointed to the post of responsible for the deserts east of Thebes. He later became representative to foreign countries, â€Å"standard bearer† (leader) of the king’s guard, captain of the ship Meri-amen, and commander of the police force (2000). As time progressed, finding capable soldiers became almost impossible. Empires expanded, making the need even greater. It was during this time that the Egyptians began to enlist prisoners of war into their army (e.g. Sherden, captured during the incursions of the Sea Peoples) (Dollginer, 2000; Schulman, 1964). During the late period in ancient Egypt, foreign commanders, even those of a different ethnic group, frequently led mercenary troops. However, foreigner’s allegiance was often far from what the Egypt army needed. Dollinger explains, â€Å"†¦obedience was not always ensured† (2000). Nevertheless, such disobedience was handled accordingly, even in a most violent manner (e.g., Phanes of Halicarnassos deserted to Cambyses; his troops punished him by killing his children before his eyes). Egyptian history -especially that of its military- is comprised of diversity and rich changes. Covering all aspects and timelines within these pages is impossible. However, through the brief references, this paper supports ancient Egyptian military as a strong emerging force that advanced from a subtle state to a mass enterprise. The military was formerly known as a meek unit, rarely engaging in any major battle. Today, historians reveal the Egyptian military and its evolution as one of the finest and most notable armies in the world. References: Dollinger, A. (2000). A Short History of Ancient Egypt. Retrieved January 3, 2007 from http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/history.htm Gabriel, R. A. & Metz, K. S. (1991). From Sumer to Rome: The Military Capabilities of Ancient   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Armies. Greenwood Press: Westport, CT, 2-24. Lichtheim, M. The Autobiography of Weni. Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol.1, p. 19. Schulman, A.R. (1964) Military Rank, Title and Organization in the Egyptian New Kingdom, Hessling: Munich.   

Power of distribution - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 12 Words: 3513 Downloads: 4 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Report Tags: Act Essay Did you like this example? In the Estate of Herbert North Summary The answer to the question is that none of the individuals described have authority to act as the situation stands. A representative needs to be appointed before the estate can be administered. Herbert North’s assets will therefore have to be collected in by a court appointed representative and divided among those who are entitled to inherit his assets. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Power of distribution" essay for you Create order It must be impressed upon Mary that Flo, as Herbert’s girlfriend may have the status of a dependant, and this will be discussed throughout the course of the essay. The key actor therefore in this set of circumstances may very well be Flo as if she is able to establish that she had the status of a dependant, she may be entitled to what is known as a statutory payment or other financial provisions, or may be entitled to apply for the status of a spouse, in which case she could in some ways benefit from the estate as if she were married to Herbert. Mary must remember that even if she is appointed as a personal representative, this does not mean that she is going to be the main beneficiary. A personal representative must divide the estate in accordance with succession law, and may be personally liable if this is not done responsibly and in accordance with these rules. Personal representatives, their powers and responsibilities, the technicalities of how an estate is administere d, and what happens if there are more than one personal representative are issues which will be discussed in detail as the essay progresses. However, for the purposes of summarising, it is suffice to say that the situation of Mary and Luke depends very much on that of the other actors in the scenario, and Flo is the person whose situation may have the largest impact upon Mary. The issues which are highlighted in the essay are therefore complex and inter-related and they raise questions about current debates about the current status of the law relating to intestacy and the administration of trusts. These questions will be discussed throughout the course of the essay, but first the question of whether Herbert has made a valid will must be examined. Is the Will of Herbert North Valid? A will is a legally recognised document which can direct that a deceased person’s estate be administered in accordance with their wishes. Herbert spent the last six months of his life in a nu rsing home and there may be a question over whether he was capable of making a will in these circumstances. This of course is a matter which will be determined by the construction of the will itself, how sensibly it reads, and by the views of any individuals who may wish to question its validity. In order to make a will which is valid in law, a testator must demonstrate both testamentary capacity and testamentary intention. Testamentary Capacity was defined in the 1870 decision in Banks and Goodfellow (1870)[1] as being ‘soundness of mind, memory and understanding’ (Bamford et al. (2002) p331). In these circumstances, according to Bamford et al. (2002) p331) a testator must understand a)the nature and effects of his act, b)the extent of what he owns, and c)the moral obligation which he should consider. Under certain circumstances a will may be open to challenge on the grounds of validity if, for example it can be established that there were suspicious circumstances, if the will was not signed properly or if there may have been undue influence. Given that none of these circumstances appear to have influenced Herbert’s actual will, the writer will assume that it is a valid document. Intestacy Definition, Trusts and the Results of Intestacy The intestacy rules are laid out in the Administration of Estates Act 1925[2] and apply in order to establish how a deceased person’s property is distributed after their death, where the deceased person has not made a will to dispose of the property (Bamford et al. (2002) p331). Partial Intestacy is where the deceased has only distributed part of his property, and in this case the part which is not distributed will be distributed under the rules of intestacy (Bamford et al. (2002) p331). It must be remembered that intestacy rules only apply to property which can be disposed of by operation of a will, but for the purposes of this question, there is not such property to deal with. The intestac y rules impose what is referred to as a trust which encompasses all of the property, both personal and real which an intestate person has not disposed of by making a will. This trust is an express trust which creates obligations upon and accords certain powers to whoever is nominated as the personal representative (Bamford et al. (2002) p332). Personal Representatives and the Powers and Responsibilities of a Personal Representative A personal representative will have to administer the estate in accordance with the will and/or in accordance with the intestacy rules. A personal representative may be known either as an administrator, or as an executor. Any surviving executor who is named in a will will automatically be appointed as the personal representative, and a personal representative will be entitled to extract a grant of probate in respect of the property of the deceased. In other circumstances an individual or a group of individuals may apply to the court to ask to be app ointed as a personal representative. Geldart (1995, p128) explains the early stages of how a will must be administered: ‘†¦..the property, whether real or personal, does not go directly to those for whose benefit it is given, nor does property passing on intestacy go directly to those entitled under the rules above stated†¦[3]’. Where there has been a valid will, a personal representative may be nominated under the rules outlined in Rules 20-22 of the Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987[4]. These rules provide that in the case where there is no named executor, a ‘residuary legatee’ or ‘any other person entitled to share in the undisposed of residue’ (Bamford et al. (2002) p356) may apply to be a personal representative in the category of an administrator. When a person applies to be an administrator under the later criteria he or she must show the court why they are entitled to act in this role and they must explain why there are no other people from a higher category (for example a ‘residuary legatee’), who are entitled to act. Several people can act as administrators (Bamford et al. (2002) p341), and where there is a dispute over who should act as personal representative, the court decides who is nominated. Therefore in the circumstances of this case Flo, Luke and Mary may be entitled to make an application to be appointed an administrator of the will according them or one of them, the powers associated with personal representatives, however it must be remembered that depending upon the status of Flo, Luke or Mary may not be able to show a court that they are better placed to be appointed as personal representative and therefore extract a grant of probate. When the grant of probate has been obtained, the personal representative has a power of sale, an obligation to discharge the funeral, testamentary and administrations expense and all of the debts owed by the deceased person (Bamford e t al. (2002) p384). The personal representative will have powers to discharge the cost of having the emergency repairs done and the nursing home expenses dealt with. Also, any council tax rebate will form part of Herbert’s estate and the discretion to have Herbert buried with his grandparents falls to the personal representative, who must pay any bills in this regard. It probably does not matter that Luke has paid the gas and electric bills, however, the personal representative should check that this has been done honestly and in full and that Luke has not taken any money for himself in discharging these payments. In this investigation the personal representative should look at the bank statements of Herbert North and ask the companies concerned to send final bills with a breakdown of all payments received. The rest of the estate which remains after these expenses are discharged is referred to as the ‘residuary estate’ and this is the estate that the personal representative must distribute. Therefore it must be impressed upon Mary that the powers of a personal representative are quite limited until a grant of probate is extracted in respect of the estate (Bamford et al. (2002) p339). The early responsibilities and powers of a personal representative are described by Geldart (1995, p128) in the following way: ‘The executor or administrator, whose duties in many ways resemble those of a trustee, must in the first instance discharge the funeral expenses, the cost (including the payment of inheritance tax) of obtaining probate of the will or letters of administration, and the debts of the deceased. It is only after these claims are discharged that the executor or administrator will transfer the property to those entitled; or, if the property is settled by will and the executor is not himself trustee, to trustees for them. In many cases, as where the persons entitled are not of age, or not yet in existence, or not to be found, an exe cutor or administrator will have to retain the property in his hands for a considerable time, though he may sometimes relieve himself by a payment or transfer into court, and in any case he can obtain the direction of the court when doubts arise as to the proper course which he should take.[5]’. Therefore, Mary should be aware that she is not entitled to act in respect of funeral directions unless she has been appointed as the personal representative. A problem arises therefore that she has already ordered Herbert’s funeral in a somewhat extravagant way. The duty of a personal representative is to discharge only reasonable funeral expenses (Bamford et al. (2002, p384) and therefore if another is appointed personal representative she may be asked to refund some of these monies and to pay for what is not reasonable herself. Equally, if Mary is the personal representative, she has a duty to discharge reasonable expense in the organisation of the funeral. Also, what Mary pays for the funeral, if she has been nominated as personal representative is still open to challenge by other interested parties in the situation and these parties may apply to the court to fix any unreasonable costs, upon Mary personally. Mary should be advised not to take any further action until she knows whether she will be appointed as personal representative, and perhaps she could be advised to try to recover any deposit she has already paid out in ordering Herbert’s funeral or indeed to attempt to cancel arrangements already made if it transpires that she will not be nominated as personal representative. Again, it needs to be impressed upon Mary that she will not be able to discharge debts for example those owed to Bill’s Bookies, unless she has achieved the status of personal representative. Powers of Distribution According to Bamford et al. (2002, p339) a personal representative must wait until six months after the issue of a grant of probate, befo re they are entitled to distribute assets under it, otherwise they may be personally (Bamford et al. (2002) p341) liable to satisfy any valid claim to the estate if insufficient assets are left after distribution. Luke is not entitled to distribute the estate unless he has the power to act afforded through the grant of probate and through his nomination as a personal representative. In these circumstances some common sense steps may help Mary to ensure that Luke does not benefit from the residuary estate unlawfully. Given that Mary suspects that Luke may have taken some items of household furniture for himself, she should tell him by notice in writing (sent by recorded delivery) that he is not entitled to distribute the estate without having the powers to act which are vested in personal representatives. Mary could consider making a report to the police and if Luke is clearing the house, this may be unlawful activity. It may also help Mary to try to compile an inventory of all it ems of household furniture which remain. She can ask the police to assist her in this regard, for the purposes of gaining entry to the house. Alternatively she may consider suing Luke to potentially recover her share of what she suspects he has taken for himself, but this could be difficult if she does not know exactly what has been taken and it may be difficult if she is not personal representative. In all of these circumstances, Mary will be in a better position to act if she has been appointed personal representative. Mary, or indeed another party charged with the responsibility of personal representative may also be able to ask the court to make an order for Luke to surrender his keys. Is Flo a Dependant? The status of spouse may be applied for where a person can show that they were dependant upon the deceased person in accordance with the criteria laid down in The Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. Geldart (1995) describes the purpose and provisio ns of this Act: ‘†¦. (The)Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, which increases the range of dependants who may apply for provision on death and gives the court wider powers than previously existed so that it can make whatever type of order may be most appropriate in the circumstances†¦. (A dependant is)†¦a person who was being wholly or partly maintained by the deceased immediately before his death. To qualify in this†¦category a dependant need not have been related to the deceased, and thus a mistress would be included. Furthermore, there is no qualifying period during which the applicant must have received maintenance from the deceased†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.[6]’. These rules may be of relevance to Herbert’s long term girlfriend, Flo, and if this is the case Mary should be advised that her entitlement to a legacy may be drastically affected by Flo’s status in this regard. The status of dependant in many ways is aki n to that of a married spouse, depending on the circumstances and where a status equivalent to a married spouse is achieved by a dependant this must be the result of a court order. Mary should be advised that under Section Four of these provisions, Flo has only six weeks from the issue of a grant of probate to apply for the status of a dependant, although the court may extend this time period as a matter of discretion (Bamford et al. (2002, p337). If Flo does make an application under this legislation, she must be able to show that she was being maintained by Herbert, either partially or wholly. ‘Maintained’ means that a ‘substantial’ contribution was being made towards the reasonable requirements of that person. Geldart (1995) gives us further detail on what is meant by the idea of being ‘maintained’: ‘Maintained means that the deceased was making a substantial contribution in money or moneys worth towards the reasonable needs of the applicant, and he did not receive full valuable consideration for this: thus food and shelter are included in the definition. The court may attach to its grant such conditions as it sees fit. The maintenance ordered may be in the form of a lump sum, by way of periodical payments of income, or by transfer or settlement of specific property, or the variation of a settlement. Such payments to a spouse will normally end if he or she remarries, but†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦provisions†¦.excluding a child from further benefit on attaining the age of majority or on marriage have been repealed by the 1975 Act. The court must take into consideration the nature of the testators property, the pecuniary position of the dependant, his or her conduct to the testator, and any other relevant circumstance, and the testators reasons for the dispositions made by him in his will†¦[7]’. As Herbert’s house is his main asset Flo may be entitled to an absolute interest in her share of it, if she achieves the status of a dependant under these provisions. She may also be entitled to a statutory legacy which is currently  £200000 and is tax free. However, under the rules of intestacy, a spouse is defined as a person to whom the spouse was married to when he or she died. Therefore, if there is no spouse or person to whom the Inheritance Act 1975 applies to, then issue of the deceased will be the beneficiaries, and in this case, the issue are Luke and Mary, who are entitled to take the undisposed property of Herbert under the intestacy rules, in the event of a failure by Flo to establish that she is a dependant. The Squatter Squatting is not regarded as a criminal offense. However, it must be explained to Mary that she must not try to enter the property by damaging windows or doors. Equally, a squatter who damages windows or doors is liable to be arrested. Mary or the personal representative may be entitled to obtain a court order to evict the squatter. The person al representative should make immediate efforts to have this squatter removed, bearing in mind that it is illegal to force entry in some circumstances and that it is illegal to intimidate the squatter through the use or the threat of force. Luke may also be a squatter if he moves in immediately and wishes to occupy the property rent free and if he does so he is liable to be evicted also. Inheritance Tax Mary is right to suspect that the assets may attract inheritance tax, although a recent change to the Inheritance tax legislation operates favourably in this regard as the lower threshold for Inheritance tax has just been increased to  £285,000, as of April 2006. This newspaper extract shows the full nature of the change to the legislation: ‘Inheritance tax is currently charged at 40 per cent of the value of all assets passed on above the  £275,000 threshold, although this is set to increase to  £285,000 in April†¦[8]’. However, only the person ent itled to inherit should be concerned with Inheritance tax and it is not clear yet that Mary will be entitled to inherit Herbert’s assets. Gifts Any gifts given by Herbert may be taxable as this extract from the Mail on Sunday indicates: ‘Gifts given within seven years of death are taxable, except those to a husband or wife†¦.and gifts to charities are exempt as are [pounds sterling] 250 cash handouts, certain cash wedding gifts and payments into a life policy..[9]’. The responsibility to open an account with the Inland Revenue falls to the personal representative who should ensure that all tax is paid properly. If there was an undue influence involved in the giving of this gift or if Herbert was not of sound mind at the time, as might have been the case in the case of the gift to the Matron, a court may order the money or jewelry to be returned. However, it may be difficult to prove the circumstances surrounding the bequest of these gifts and acc ordingly, the person nominated as personal representative should use their discretion to see if it is worthwhile to pursue this avenue. Conclusion These are the issues that Mary should be made aware of by the solicitor. She must understand both the limitations of her power at each stage of the process and the extent of any power a nomination as personal representative may lead to. She must understand that she may not be entitled to benefit in the way that she might like and must understand the entitlements that Flo may secure. Bibliography Books Geldart, W. (1995) Introduction to English Law. Publisher: Oxford University Press. Place of Publication: Oxford. Publication Year: 1995. Bamford, K., Bramley, S., Fraser, J., Halberstadt, R., Morgan, A., Norris, M., Pooley, S. and Riddett, R. (2001-2002) The College of Law: Legal Practice Course, Pervasive and Core Topics. Publisher: Jordans. Place of Publication: Bristol. Publication Year: 2001-2002. Articles Anonym ous (March 2006) Budget 2006 Inheritance Tax Hopes Dashed. Available at: lt;lt; https://www.myfinances.co.uk/news/economy/the-budget-and-pre-budget/budget-2006-inheritance-tax-hopes-dashed-$340734.htm gt;gt;. Anonymous (1996) Avoid the Grief Bequeathed Without a Will. The Mail on Sunday. Publication Date: October 13, 1996. p15. 1 Footnotes [1] LR 5 QB 549 [2] (AEA 1925) [3] p128. Geldart, W. (1995) Introduction to English Law. Publisher: Oxford University Press. Place of Publication: Oxford. Publication Year: 1995. [4] (NCPR 1987) [5] p128. Geldart, W. (1995) Introduction to English Law. Publisher: Oxford University Press. Place of Publication: Oxford. Publication Year: 1995. [6] p122. Geldart, W. (1995) Introduction to English Law. Publisher: Oxford University Press. Place of Publication: Oxford. Publication Year: 1995. [7] p122. Geldart, W. (1995) Introduction to English Law. Publisher: Oxford University Press. Place of Publication: Oxford. Publication Year: 1995. [8] Anonymous (March 2006) Budget 2006 Inheritance Tax Hopes Dashed Available at: lt;lt; https://www.myfinances.co.uk/news/economy/the-budget-and-pre-budget/budget-2006-inheritance-tax-hopes-dashed-$340734.htm gt;gt;. [9] p1. Anonymous. Avoid the Grief Bequeathed Without a Will. The Mail on Sunday. Publication Date: October 13, 1996. p15.