Drama. Drama is the cornerstone for reference. We need to look at this particular stone in order to get a realistic impression of the virtual. We still need to look at it and understand what CyberWar is or how it is defined.
When it comes to cyber-brains, exaggeration and transportation is the rule, not the exception. Cyberthis, cyberthat – you may have noticed that the virtual world is inhabited by nouns and verbs taken from the physical world and that images of cyberthings in the news tend to have dramatic images of physical things rather than the electrons that make up the cyberworld. Coin icons reside in stories of purely virtual encryption, such as BitCoin. Perhaps physics journals, where readers are really interested in cyberrealm's electrons and mathematics, are the exception to this rule.
But when we read stories of cybercriminals, we see pictures of soldiers, guns and material that accompany the story. When we read about people sitting at desks and computers trying to figure out how to chisel and not get confused, we call them CyberWarriors and pictures of men in jackets and helmets accompany these stories. I wonder what CyberItem will be accompanied by photos of tanks and bombs.
In addition to the dramatic images and photos, what is CyberWar? In 2010, Richard Clarke, the former Special Adviser to the President on cybersecurity, characterized cyberwarfare as "the actions of one nation state to infiltrate computers or networks of another nation to cause harm or interruption". Most importantly, a nation-state must be recognized as the perpetrator. If this is true, then we have obviously already been involved in long-term cyberattacks, with attacks both to and from China, Russia, the US, Israel, Georgia, Ukraine, Korea, Syria, Iran, Estonia. And much more. And while countries always refuse to do so, there have been clear indicators, equivalent to proving, that these countries have put their digital attackers on each other's networks, computers and data. Damages to these networks, computers and data are reported.
Certainly, there have been cyberattacks from and to states. But is it CyberWar? Dr Thomas Rid, Professor of Security Studies at King's College, says there is no Cyberwar. It tends to define the brain in terms of natural infrastructure disasters – scenarios where water stops flowing, lights go out, trains run derailment, banks lose our financial records, roads go down, chaos fails, and planes are falling from the sky. " And he says it's not going to happen. In fact, he has a 2013 book called, "Government War Will Not Happen."
Others are not so strict about the subject and the possibilities. In the United States, amid falling government spending in most areas, the Cyber Command budget is booming. It has almost doubled from year to year: $ 118 million in 2012, $ 212 million in 2013, and $ 447 million in 2014. He buys a lot of electrons, a lot of code, and a lot of sans flak jackets. These increases lead to similar, though not as dramatic, inflation of cyberbudgets in other countries.
With all the cybertools in hand and the ones created, wouldn't you be tempted to use them? Is CyberWar inevitable, or is there a way out? It's a question that morals take seriously. Have big thinkers like Patrick Lin, Fritz Alhoff and Neil C. Rowe written enough articles, such as how can a just cyber war be fought? and War 2.0: Cyberweapons and ethics to explore alternatives. There are laws of (conventional) war and there should be similar guidelines for circular phenomena. It is not too early yesterday to start considering these issues seriously.
When trying to respond to the phrase that is the title of this article, it must be all over the map, because the definition of cyberwar is, like this article, all over the map. They are actually and literally all over the world. The definition of cyberspace varies from country to country and organization to organization. An article titled (Complete Transport), Cyberwarfare Wild West attempts to seriously suggest such different ideas on the subject, despite its title. Her talk is useful, but her conclusion is necessarily amorphous.
The 302-page Tallinn Handbook is the result of a three-year study by experts on the subject trying to make such definitions. It can be read for free. However, the conclusions reached here are not respected by all potential cyber-parties.
So what is the best answer we can give the state of CyberWar in the world? Cyberattacks are plentiful worldwide. These are executed by many government agencies and stateless. They are carried out by government agencies that transfer responsibility to other states and to stateless actors who claim to have no control or levy but who are nonetheless politically aligned. These are carried out by hacktivists who seek political change by disabling or removing sites, networks and information. These are carried out by those with a net profit motive. And they are practiced by modernists who simply find joy in less chaos.
All of these attacks are on the rise, though the vast majority remain relatively simple developments such as Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS). However, there is little evidence that physical infrastructure is significantly affected. There is little evidence that people are physically harmed by such attacks. It is not known whether such events will actually happen.
Dr. Rid says he won't win. Dr. Lin, Alhoff and Rowe point the way to avoiding such harm. Richard Clarke and former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta say it is inevitable and we need to prepare – hundreds of millions of dollars.
Albert Einstein fantasized: "You cannot prevent and prepare for war at the same time." Hopefully, in the case of the cyber war, it was wrong.