Cybermilitias, black hat hackers and other non-nation-state bad guys blur the lines on the virtual battlefield.
Analysts and strategists gathered at the Cyber Warfare 2009 conference in London last January were grappling with some thorny problems associated with the cyberaggression threat. One that proved particularly vexing was the matter of exactly what constitutes cyberwarfare under international law. There's no global agreement on the definitions of cyberwarfare or cyberterrorism, so how does a nation conform to the rule of law if it's compelled to respond to a cyberattack?
Back in the U.S. trenches, drawing up a legal battle plan is indeed proving to be extraordinarily complex. Those definitions are especially elusive when you consider that no one can even be sure who the potential combatants are.
More: http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9130830&source=NLT_PRN
Analysts and strategists gathered at the Cyber Warfare 2009 conference in London last January were grappling with some thorny problems associated with the cyberaggression threat. One that proved particularly vexing was the matter of exactly what constitutes cyberwarfare under international law. There's no global agreement on the definitions of cyberwarfare or cyberterrorism, so how does a nation conform to the rule of law if it's compelled to respond to a cyberattack?
Back in the U.S. trenches, drawing up a legal battle plan is indeed proving to be extraordinarily complex. Those definitions are especially elusive when you consider that no one can even be sure who the potential combatants are.
More: http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9130830&source=NLT_PRN
