Cyber Warfare Is Not Fully Understood

There are two main ideas covered in the first chapter. The first is that the idea of a free and open internet, while containing some merit at first, is going away quickly, with governments rapidly finding ways to exert control over the use of cyberspace both in their borders and out. The second main idea is that cyberwarfare and computers present new angles of conflict from conventional weaponry such as the intended targets, method of implementation, potential impacts, and level of damage caused. The author draws on multiple examples from different countries and time periods to support his main

Primarily, cyber security of the armed forces must be a priority of the United States. As the world becomes increasingly digital, the military must also adapt its ways. A new form of combat, hybrid warfare, has been effective in attaining political objectives without the conventional use of military power (Limnell). Hybrid warfare includes

Pfleeger, S. Pfleeger, and Margulies (2015) outline possible examples of cyber warfare between Canada and China (p. 844). According to Pfleeger, S. Pfleeger, and Margulies (2015), “the Canadian government revealed that several of its national departments had been victims of a cyber attack…” (p. 844). Eventually, the attack was unofficially traced to a computer in China (p. 844). Cyber warfare can be used negatively and positively. It is evident that China was seeking to gain protected information form Canada. Although a purpose of cyber warfare, it is not a conventional way of obtaining information. Additionally, cyber warfare can be used to collect intelligence on an enemy. Anyone seeking to gather intelligence on another individual or group can launch a cyber attack that gains access to protected files. This could be used to help future militant operations or expose critical information. Lastly, cyber warfare can be used to test systems internally. Acting with no malicious intent, “insiders” can utilizing cyber warfare tactics to attack their own cyber security barriers in order to test the strength of their systems. Seeking to expose the vulnerabilities in a system that contains important assets without actually harming the assets provides the system a diagnosis of what needs to be strengths and fixed. Identifying the problem or threats before an actual attack can ultimately save the protected

Since the very first war on record, each belligerent has attempted to find more advanced ways to defeat the other. Usually wars have been fought traditionally: “In terms of conventional, classic war, definitions are almost identical around the world: type of war where weapons of mass destruction are not used, only classical combat means, the fight is fought only by regular armed forces” (Frunzet), called conventional warfare. As populations around the globe grew, another type of warfare came about. This other warfare can be classified as, “activities taken to enable a resistance movement or insurgency to coerce, undermine or overthrow a government or occupying power by operations conducted through or with illegal auxiliary or guerrilla power, in a restricted area” (Frunzet), this is known as unconventional warfare. Most adversaries that the United States has faced can be classified as either a conventional or unconventional force. Since moving into the information revolution, there is another type of battle tactic that has come into existence: cyber warfare. This involves attacking enemies via the Internet, targeting anything that requires Internet access, such as power plants. Recently, U.S. forces and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies have noticed a new type of war and given a name to this different style of war: hybrid warfare. Hybrid warfare is not new; it has been around for some time, but it was not until recently that it has been studied.

By using the term ill prepared, I aim to convey that the United States is not equipped with enough protection to prevent every possible instance of the threat of cyberwarfare from occurring. I propose we are not where our nation should be in terms of dealing with all actual occurrences of the threat of cyberwarfare, were it to be fully realized. This can be carried over into our response capability to any such attack, which may manifest in many forms. For example, our response against perpetrators and those who aid or comfort

These are the iconic opening lines of Bethesda’s hit game franchise Fallout, but are they accurate? War has expanded into a new electronic frontier, where the soldiers are hackers and the targets are anything with wires. To understand this new kind of war, we must analyze what it is, who has this power, and how they can use it. Cyberwarfare has the potential to do to global politics what nuclear warfare did half a century ago.

In order to properly answer the question posed we must first define what cyber-war and cyber-terrorism are. The Oxford Dictionaries defines cyber-war as “The use of computer technology to disrupt the activities of a state or organization, especially the deliberate attacking of communication systems by another state or organization:” Although there is no dictionary definition of cyber-terrorism, The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has defined it as “the use of computer network tools to shut down critical national infrastructures (e.g., energy, transportation, government operations) or to coerce or intimidate a government or civilian population.” The author defines cyber terror as “the intimidation of civilian enterprise through the use of high technology to bring about political, religious, or ideological aims, actions that result in disabling or deleting critical infrastructure data or information.”

For years, it was widely believed that the next World War would be centered on the use of nuclear weaponry. However, the development of viruses has furthered cyberwarfare, and in recent years the attention has shifted from a nuclear threat to a cyber one. Having the ability to completely, dismantle another country’s entire infrastructure without leaving your desk is clearly much simpler than using nuclear weapons. “The treat of a cyberattack is a clear and present danger to America and is more likely than a nuclear attack.” (The Hill) Even higher ranking defense officials are realizing that the focus must shift to cyberwar, instead of the traditional nuclear missiles. Additionally, the cost for cyberwarfare is significantly less than the cost of nuclear

While actively engaged in conflict, we are members of a very complex, unstable, and ever-changing environment. Scholars like Sun-Tzu and Clausewitz have both studied warfare extensively, and approach it from two very different angles. These approaches provide two main schools of thought when considering warfare and should be understood so that a place may be found for cyber-warfare. Sun Tzu’s (2013) main theme contends that weapons

Some army seniors claim that the cultures of the Army currently in place, Navy, and Air Force are can’t match that of war against cybercrimes. Major Robert Costa, U.S.AF came up with a suggestion of the fourth branch of the military. In reaction to complains about the military's freedom to tackle to cyber threats , General Alexander mentioned that United States must fight back against cybercrimes very first and should do something to prevent any future threat even when the the attacker is

Authors Gartze and Rid attempt to use the Clausewitz key words of force, violence, and lethality in their argument against a cyber war (Cyber War Will Take Place, Stone). This definition is archaic and does not take in to account the new world environment and power of some state and non-state actors in the cyber realm.

Simply put, because of their socially constructed origins, computer technologies remain as tools, increasingly complex tools, but tools nonetheless. Computer technologies materially enhance the means for the competition; information is distributed faster and to a broader audience. Lines of code in automated machines fuse data easing the warfighter’s cognitive burden thereby expanding combat capability. In that sense, computer technology is no different than the stirrup or firearms. Each makes the competition appear faster and more devastating. Most significantly, a society can choose to adopt a particular technology to fulfill a need or perhaps a want. A military may adopt a new technology to better accomplish its national security mission and to mitigate degrees of uncertainty. Conversely, a society may reject or abandon a particular technology either based upon its utility, morality, or some combination of the two. One must remember that any technology, at any developmental stages, exists as a

United States Cyber Command is less than four years old. The merger and stand down of the Joint Functional Component Command for Network Warfare (JFCC-NW) and the Joint task Force for Global Network Operations (JTF-GNO) formed the bulk of the new organization. 9 This new construct integrated offensive and defensive cyber capabilities in one organization resulting in efficient and effective planning and execution of cyberspace operations. United States Cyber Command is tasked with operations to defend DOD information networks and to conduct full spectrum military cyberspace operations across all domains. 10 United States Cyber Command is also tasked with ensuring US freedom of action in cyberspace and denying freedom of actions to our

For thousands of years warfare remained relatively unchanged. While the tactics and weapons have changed as new methods of combat evolved, men and women or their weapons still had to meet at the same time and place in order to attack, defend, surrender or conquer. However, the advent of the of the internet has created a new realm of combat in which armies can remotely conduct surveillance, reconnaissance, espionage, and attacks from an ambiguous and space-less digital environment. Both state and non-state actors have already embraced this new realm and utilized both legal and illegal means to further facilitate their interests. What complicates cyber security further is as states attempt to protect themselves from cyber-warfare, private

The branches of the military, for a couple generations, have always been the Army, Navy, Air force, Marine Corps, and the Coast Guard; however, in an ever evolving digital world, the notion that outer space would be the next military front is being rapidly replaced by the idea that cyber space will be the next arms race. The United States has been defending attacks on their infrastructure day after day, night after night, when one hacker on one side of the world sleeps, another takes their place to attempt to compromise the US government. The motives may range from a political ‘hacktivist’ trying to prove a point, to an economic spy, trying to gain a competitive edge on its more upstart rivals, to an attempt to control the United States