Internet instability and disturbance: goal or menace?

Self-replicating code has become an unfortunate part of today's online environment. Viruses and worms have the ability to become pandemic within minutes of first release, and our protection systems are primarily reactive in nature. Thus, there is little or no protection from a new worm which uses a remote exploit in order to spread. Furthermore, such rapidly-moving threats have a documented ability to cause systemic outages; ultimately, such attacks may threaten the overall stability of the Internet itself.Currently, most exploits leveraged by worms have been well-known and easily solvable if the system maintainer had followed best security practices (e.g. deployed a firewall and/or carried out timely patching of vulnerabilities). Thus, actions which drive practitioners toward tighter security are likely to have a positive long-term impact on the overall stability of the global network.In this paper, we take the unusual position that low-level virus and worm outbreaks are highly beneficial to the overall goal of preventing catastrophic Internet failure. To illustrate this position we draw from a biological analogy: the Intermediate Disturbance Hypothesis. This hypothesis argues that within many natural systems it is a continual cycle of disruption which drives diversity... and hence stability and resilience. Finally, we conclude that the deliberate release of viruses and worms that are not threatening holistically may be a necessary approach to protect the Internet from catastrophic outbreaks. This position is supported by empirical evidence from the computer world and by further comparison with biological systems.