in cyberspace essay

• Senior Fellows
• Research Fellows
• Submission Guidelines
• Media Inquiries
• Commentary & Analysis

Upcoming Events

• Past Events
• October 2021 War Studies Conference
• November 2020 War Studies Conference
• November 2018 War Studies Conference
• March 2018 War Studies Conference
• November 2016 War Studies Conference
• Class of 1974 MWI Podcast
• Urban Warfare Project Podcast
• Social Science of War
• Urban Warfare Project
• Project 6633
• Shield Notes
• Rethinking Civ-Mil
• Book Reviews

Select Page

Confronting Cyber Threats: Challenges and Opportunities

Michael Poznansky | 07.26.21

Editor’s note: This article is the final piece in a series, “Full-Spectrum: Capabilities and Authorities in Cyber and the Information Environment.” The series endeavors to present expert commentary on diverse issues surrounding US competition with peer and near-peer competitors in the cyber and information spaces.   Read all articles in the series  here .

Special thanks to series editors Capt. Maggie Smith, PhD of the Army Cyber Institute and MWI fellow Dr. Barnett S. Koven.

A flurry of recent high-profile cyber operations targeting the United States, including the SolarWinds hack by Russia , the Microsoft Exchange hack by China , and the ransomware attack on Colonial Pipeline , among others , has led to spirited debate about how the United States can best defend itself and advance its interests in cyberspace. In May 2021, President Joe Biden released a detailed executive order to “improv[e] the nation’s cybersecurity.” The first head of the recently created Office of the National Cyber Director, Chris Inglis, was just sworn in . There are clearly more changes on the horizon to the institutional architecture, strategy documents, and policies in this domain.

With that in mind, this essay explores two of a much larger set of challenges facing the United States in cyberspace in the coming years. First is the perennial tension between the desire for more coordination and oversight on the one hand and flexibility, agility, and responsiveness on the other. The second turns on a particular kind of asymmetry in which the United States has certain vulnerabilities that its chief rivals do not, and the effect this has on interactions in cyberspace.

Balancing Agility and Coordination

One of the most pressing issues to grapple with in the coming years is how to strike the right balance between responding expeditiously to malicious activity in cyberspace and simultaneously ensuring proper coordination across the federal government. Former President Donald Trump’s widely reported decision in 2018 to give certain entities —most notably US Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM)—more authority to carry out offensive cyber operations tipped the scales in favor of speed and efficiency. According to news outlets , by rescinding PPD-20 , an Obama-era policy that required interagency coordination of offensive cyber operations, the Trump administration sought to give USCYBERCOM the ability to swiftly take the fight to the adversary without getting bogged down in bureaucratic red tape. Reports also suggest that the CIA has similarly been given more freedom of action in cyberspace.

The benefits of such a strategy are straightforward. Unlike more conventional domains, cyberspace is characterized by constant contact . As such, the United States must be in a position where it is operating continuously rather than reactively. Continuous competition is the logic behind strategic concepts such as persistent engagement and defend forward . Rescinding PPD-20 was likely part and parcel of such a strategy. The fact that the Biden administration has reportedly kept this decision in place—at least for operations of a certain size—suggests that it may be with us for the foreseeable future. But what are the broader implications of this approach?

One commonly discussed risk of granting USCYBERCOM broader authority to act first and unilaterally in cyberspace is that it could inadvertently jeopardize ongoing intelligence operations. In this view, the military may choose to conduct an offensive cyber operation against a given target without regard for, or possibly even awareness of, whether US intelligence agencies are currently collecting against that same target. The fact that the commander of USCYBERCOM also serves as the head of the National Security Agency (what is known as a dual-hat role ) may mitigate this problem somewhat, but not entirely.

Prioritizing speed and efficiency over coordination has several other potential implications. First, it could impact the dynamics of escalation in cyberspace . It may be true, as some argue , that the risks are actually negligible given the “self-dampening mechanisms” of cyber operations (e.g., attribution is not instantaneous, it takes time for victims to mount an appropriate counter-response, and there are limits on “the scale and magnitude of the costs that can be imposed solely through cyber campaigns.”)

While these arguments may apply in the short term, they could be less relevant for escalation risks in the long term. If adversaries do not have the capacity to immediately respond to an increase in the amount and kind of offensive cyber operations aimed at them, they may still seek to invest in new capabilities that could harm the United States in the future. Moreover, even the short-term risks of escalation may be greater than they seem at first. Targets may have prepositioned cyber assets that are capable of hitting back but which are unknown to the United States. And the states most likely to be potential targets of an increasingly empowered USCYBERCOM— Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea —may be precisely those who have offensive capabilities they can leverage.

This leads naturally to another point, namely that the empowerment of USCYBERCOM and the potential disconnect from other arms of the US government may impede the ability to gain an accurate understanding of who is doing what to whom and why. This is especially important for those tasked with defending the nation. If the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, or even the National Cyber Director — whose job is to “lead the implementation of national cyber policy and strategy”—are not fully aware of what is happening on the offensive side, they may be caught off guard and less prepared to optimize America’s defenses.

This issue is related, but slightly distinct from, Jason Healey and Robert Jervis’s point in this series about the challenges of overclassification. For them, the layers of secrecy in cyberspace make it difficult to figure out cause and effect. My claim is slightly different but complementary. In short, it is the fact that one arm of the US government may be conducting operations against rivals that lead to a counter-response without the other arms of government being aware of this, and therefore drawing incorrect inferences and failing to anticipate potential retaliation from a defensive standpoint. In this scenario, it is not classification per se that is the problem but rather a lack of coordination.

Moreover, given the breadth of vulnerabilities in cyberspace that US adversaries can exploit, there is a necessary and symbiotic relationship between offensive and defensive operations. Offensive tactics inform defensive tactics and vice versa. Reduced visibility among those charged with defending the nation and those carrying out offensive operations against adversaries, while perhaps appealing from the standpoint of maximum efficiency, could inadvertently make the United States less effective at both.

Beyond escalation and coordination, the decision to remove certain constraints on USCYBERCOM could also affect US diplomacy, both the standard kind and the coercive variant. With respect to traditional diplomacy, it is useful for US diplomats and negotiators to understand any potential ongoing operations against the country they are dealing with. As Healey has noted, “If you’re meeting President Xi or Chancellor Merkel, it is not unfair for your NSC to know what US Cyber Command is up to and develop options to slow down (or speed up) such operations to send diplomatic signals or reducing the chances of a mistake which weakens your negotiating position.”

Regarding coercive diplomacy, prioritizing speed and efficiency when it comes to carrying out offensive cyber operations could have mixed effects. On the one hand, giving entities like USCYBERCOM more leeway may make it easier to credibly impose costs on rivals, thereby contributing to deterrence; indeed, this is part of the argument by proponents of this strategy. But if offensive cyber operations are too disconnected from other tools of US statecraft, it may impede the ability of decision makers to bring to bear all relevant pressure points for a more holistic coercive strategy (e.g., the imposition of sanctions, and so forth). Additionally, successful coercion in many cases could benefit from a degree of reassurance. That is, targets should believe that if they comply with demands they may not only avoid punishment but reap rewards. But if targets come to expect that USCYBERCOM is acting independently of entities that provide these benefits, reassurance is harder.

Another potential implication of enabling USCYBERCOM to carry out offensive cyber operations without broader input if it wishes to do so is that the United States could end up in a situation where tactics are driving strategy rather than the reverse. It may well be that in cyberspace, this is inevitable. The fast-moving nature of the domain combined with the reality of constant contact might mean that the best we can ever do is disrupt and degrade the ability of adversaries to do us harm.

But cyber activity does not occur in a vacuum. It is, or at least should be, tied to a state’s broader geopolitical objectives. Without conscious deliberation about how any given operation serves the United States’ broader foreign policy goals, there is a chance of conducting operations in adversary networks simply because the United States can, without asking whether and under what conditions it should. Indeed, many of the current debates about how we ought to conceive of cyberspace (e.g., as an intelligence contest or a variant of counterinsurgency as Emma Schroeder, Simon Handler, and Trey Herr argue in this series) entail different solutions that may or may not be well served by persistent engagement.

To be sure, it may well be that the Biden administration’s decision as reported in the New York Times to continue providing USCYBERCOM a longer leash to carry out “day-to-day, short-of-war skirmishes in cyberspace” while requiring greater coordination with the National Security Council on larger operations can mitigate many of these challenges. But mounting pressure to respond more quickly and forcefully to the spate of recent attacks could conceivably change things. Moreover, one can easily imagine semantic battles over what constitutes a “significant” attack such that it would require deliberation, or not.

Asymmetric Vulnerabilities

Another issue scholars and practitioners working on cyber issues will have to wrestle with in the coming years turns on asymmetries of various kinds . Oftentimes when the word “asymmetry” is used in the context of cyberspace operations, it is referring to instances in which actors engage in activities below the level of armed conflict to achieve some political objective (also known as hybrid warfare , gray-zone conflict , etc.). When I use the term asymmetries, I am referring to the unique set of vulnerabilities the United States has that rivals may not have and its effect on strategic dynamics in cyberspace.

The issue of election meddling specifically, and disinformation more broadly, is emblematic of this problem. Figuring out how to guard against malign foreign activity on these fronts is not simply a matter of cracking the code on how to credibly threaten punishment using cyber tools or any other means for that matter. The problem facing the United States is more complicated. One of the core challenges is that the actors most responsible for these activities are not vulnerable in the same way.

Consider that the two main perpetrators of meddling in the 2020 presidential election according to a recently declassified report —Russia and Iran—do not hold competitive, free and fair elections themselves. Moreover, these states, as well as China, tightly control the internet . While they are not immune from disinformation, they are likely less vulnerable. Hence the asymmetries.

America’s rivals are aware of this situation and act accordingly. As Sandor Fabian and Janis Berzins write in this series , Russia subscribes to “the idea that democratic societies are vulnerable to political manipulation.” Thomas Rid similarly argues that “disinformation operations, in essence, erode the very foundation of open societies.” Foreign actors are thus eager to continue meddling in US elections and propagating disinformation despite attempts to expose and disrupt their ability to do so.

This asymmetry also makes it more difficult to figure out what a proper response should be (bracketing the obvious, bolstering defenses, which we should try to do regardless). The astute reader may wonder why the United States cannot simply do to rivals what they are doing to the United States. As Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recently put it , the United States “also needs to take the offensive from time to time, especially against its primary adversaries. Authoritarian governments must get a taste of their own medicine.” This could include carrying out cyber intrusions aimed at delegitimizing and undermining those responsible for malign activity or “ interfering in the systems that authoritarian countries use to surveil their own populations .”

US policymakers can obviously try to do these things, but the dynamics may not be the same. Research in political science about the different modes of exit —how leaders leave office—in democratic versus authoritarian regimes is potentially relevant here. In the former, the losers of elections can usually carry on doing whatever it is they wish to do. In authoritarian systems, leaders who lose power face the prospect of exile, punishment, or even death. To put it more concretely, when an adversary interferes in US elections to hurt a candidate and that candidate loses, the consequences are not as dire relative to the costs Putin, Xi, or the Ayatollahs in Iran would face were the United States to stir up the opposition by spreading propaganda and disinformation to undermine their regimes.

This does not mean we should simply accept interference in our elections; we should not. But it does unfortunately make the problem of how to respond more complex. Were the United States to adopt an eye-for-an-eye approach, it may be inherently more escalatory owing to the nature of the target, to say nothing of whether it would be in the United States’ interest to go down this road. The broader point is that the difficulty of threatening retaliation of a similar nature means that policymakers are often left with the choice of imposing costs that are disproportionate—in the direction of either too much, relative to the offense, or too little. This is not necessarily a problem, but it raises the question of what ought to be done when doing too little is unlikely to have a discernible impact on rival behavior and doing too much can heighten tensions.

The Road Ahead

As noted at the outset, the challenges identified above are a fraction of those confronting the United States. Others include whether the scale and scope of intrusions like SolarWinds render them distinct from traditional espionage, how to grapple with the fact that many of our rivals do not draw the same lines between national security espionage and economic espionage as we do, and how the pervasive secrecy that characterizes much of what goes on in cyberspace impacts the ability to develop norms and robust public-private partnerships. Nevertheless, awareness of America’s unique vulnerabilities and being clear-eyed about the pros and cons of greater coordination versus greater latitude—the two issues dealt with here—would put the United States in a better position in the coming years.

Michael Poznansky is an associate professor in the Strategic and Operational Research Department and a core faculty member in the Cyber & Innovation Policy Institute at the US Naval War College. He is the author of In the Shadow of International Law: Secrecy and Regime Change in the Postwar World (Oxford University Press, 2020).

The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, Department of Defense, US government, or any organization with which the author is affiliated, including the US Naval War College and the Department of the Navy.

Image credit: J.M. Eddins Jr., US Air Force

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

The articles and other content which appear on the Modern War Institute website are unofficial expressions of opinion. The views expressed are those of the authors, and do not reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense.

The Modern War Institute does not screen articles to fit a particular editorial agenda, nor endorse or advocate material that is published. Rather, the Modern War Institute provides a forum for professionals to share opinions and cultivate ideas. Comments will be moderated before posting to ensure logical, professional, and courteous application to article content.

Most Popular Posts

• Ten Years after the al-Awlaki Killing: A Reckoning for the United States’ Drones Wars Awaits
• The Five Reasons Wars Happen
• The Illogic of Doubling Down on a Failed Approach: Security Assistance and Terrorism in Africa

Announcements

• Call for Applications: MWI’s 2024–25 Research Fellows Program
• Join Us Friday, April 26 for a Livestream of the 2024 Hagel Lecture, Featuring Secretary Chuck Hagel and Secretary Jeh Johnson
• Announcing the Modern War Institute’s 2023–24 Senior and Research Fellows
• Essay Contest Call for Submissions: Solving the Military Recruiting Crisis

Presentations made painless

• Get Premium

127 Cyber Security Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Inside This Article

With the increasing reliance on technology, cyber security has become a critical concern for individuals, organizations, and governments worldwide. As cyber threats continue to evolve and become more sophisticated, it is essential to stay informed about the latest trends and issues in this field. If you are tasked with writing an essay on cyber security, here are 127 topic ideas and examples to get your creative juices flowing.

The role of artificial intelligence in enhancing cyber security.

The impact of cyber attacks on critical infrastructure.

The ethical considerations of cyber warfare.

The legal frameworks governing cyber security.

The challenges of securing the Internet of Things (IoT) devices.

The role of encryption in protecting sensitive information.

The effectiveness of password policies in preventing cyber attacks.

The psychology behind social engineering attacks.

The impact of cyber attacks on the global economy.

The future of biometrics in cyber security.

The role of cyber insurance in mitigating cyber risks.

The ethics of hacking for the greater good.

The impact of cyber attacks on healthcare systems.

The role of education in raising cyber security awareness.

The challenges of securing cloud computing environments.

The implications of quantum computing on cyber security.

The importance of international cooperation in combating cyber crime.

The role of cyber security in protecting intellectual property.

The impact of cyber attacks on national security.

The challenges of securing critical data in the cloud.

The role of cybersecurity audits in identifying vulnerabilities.

The impact of cyber attacks on the banking and financial sector.

The ethical implications of government surveillance for cyber security purposes.

The role of cybersecurity professionals in addressing the skills gap.

The challenges of securing personal information in the digital age.

The impact of cyber attacks on elections and democratic processes.

The role of user awareness training in preventing cyber attacks.

The implications of data breaches for consumer trust.

The challenges of securing mobile devices in the workplace.

The role of cyber security in protecting personal privacy.

The impact of cyber attacks on small businesses.

The role of cyber security in safeguarding intellectual property in academia.

The challenges of securing critical infrastructure in developing countries.

The ethical considerations of vulnerability disclosure.

The impact of cyber attacks on the transportation sector.

The role of cyber security in protecting children online.

The challenges of securing Internet of Things (IoT) in smart homes.

The implications of cyber attacks on the aviation industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against ransomware attacks.

The impact of cyber attacks on the entertainment industry.

The challenges of securing e-commerce platforms.

The role of cyber security in preventing identity theft.

The implications of cyber attacks on the energy sector.

The ethical considerations of government backdoor access to encrypted data.

The impact of cyber attacks on the hospitality and tourism industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting sensitive government information.

The challenges of securing online gaming platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the media and journalism.

The role of cyber security in protecting against social media threats.

The impact of cyber attacks on the transportation and logistics industry.

The challenges of securing online banking and financial transactions.

The role of cyber security in protecting against insider threats.

The implications of cyber attacks on the education sector.

The ethical considerations of using cyber weapons in warfare.

The impact of cyber attacks on the retail industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against insider trading.

The challenges of securing online voting systems.

The implications of cyber attacks on the gaming industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against intellectual property theft.

The impact of cyber attacks on the healthcare and pharmaceutical industry.

The challenges of securing social media platforms.

The ethical considerations of cyber security in autonomous vehicles.

The implications of cyber attacks on the hospitality industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against credit card fraud.

The impact of cyber attacks on the manufacturing industry.

The challenges of securing online dating platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the insurance industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against corporate espionage.

The impact of cyber attacks on the food and beverage industry.

The challenges of securing online marketplaces.

The implications of cyber attacks on the pharmaceutical industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against intellectual property infringement.

The impact of cyber attacks on the nonprofit sector.

The challenges of securing online streaming platforms.

The ethical considerations of cyber security in wearable technology.

The implications of cyber attacks on the real estate industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against medical identity theft.

The impact of cyber attacks on the telecommunications industry.

The challenges of securing online job portals.

The implications of cyber attacks on the automotive industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against data breaches in the legal sector.

The impact of cyber attacks on the music industry.

The challenges of securing online auction platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the construction industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against online harassment.

The impact of cyber attacks on the advertising and marketing industry.

The challenges of securing online learning platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the fashion industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against online stalking.

The impact of cyber attacks on the sports industry.

The challenges of securing online travel booking platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the beauty and cosmetics industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against online scams.

The impact of cyber attacks on the hospitality and catering industry.

The challenges of securing online dating applications.

The implications of cyber attacks on the healthcare and wellness industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against online bullying.

The impact of cyber attacks on the entertainment and events industry.

The challenges of securing online food delivery platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the fitness and wellness industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against online fraud.

The impact of cyber attacks on the home services industry.

The challenges of securing online social networking platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the pet care industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against online piracy.

The impact of cyber attacks on the restaurant industry.

The challenges of securing online fashion retail platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the healthcare and fitness industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against online hate speech.

The impact of cyber attacks on the wedding and event planning industry.

The challenges of securing online grocery delivery platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the gaming and entertainment industry.

The impact of cyber attacks on the music and entertainment industry.

The challenges of securing online travel and tourism platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the beauty and wellness industry.

The role of cyber security in protecting against online identity theft.

The impact of cyber attacks on the fashion and retail industry.

The challenges of securing online health and wellness platforms.

The implications of cyber attacks on the food and beverage industry.

These essay topic ideas cover a broad range of industries and sectors, highlighting the pervasive nature of cyber security threats. Whether you choose to explore the implications of cyber attacks on a specific industry, examine the challenges of securing a particular platform, or discuss the ethical considerations of cyber security, there are endless possibilities for research and analysis in this field. Remember to choose a topic that interests you and aligns with your objectives, ensuring a rewarding and engaging essay-writing experience.

Want to create a presentation now?

Instantly Create A Deck

Let PitchGrade do this for me

Hassle Free

We will create your text and designs for you. Sit back and relax while we do the work.

Explore More Content

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service

© 2023 Pitchgrade

Cyberspace - Essay Samples And Topic Ideas For Free

An essay on cyberspace can explore the virtual realm of the internet, its evolution, and its impact on modern society. It can delve into topics like online communication, cybersecurity, digital privacy, and the social, political, and economic implications of an interconnected world in the digital age. We’ve gathered an extensive assortment of free essay samples on the topic of Cyberspace you can find at Papersowl. You can use our samples for inspiration to write your own essay, research paper, or just to explore a new topic for yourself.

Political Participation

According to this act many researchers research on political participation but they don’t found any significantly change. According to Macedo et al. (2005) considered that political participation and civic participation are interlinked concepts, that allows to expand the civic activities. Commonly we said that the political participation are the set of activities which perform from people for some purposes like political structure, policies and officials. Which directly influence to the political policies and implementation and indirectly influence to the actor […]

Library 2.0: its Influence in Ozamiz City’s Academia

According to Stephens and Collins (2007), Podcasting is a form of audio blogging. An interview, short presentation, or speech is attached as an audio file to a blog post and syndicated via RSS. Some libraries offer podcasts as educational recordings about the library programs. Academic library podcasts focus on the new resources in the library and give information to the students through recording. Podcast is a beneficial and excellent learning tool for the slightly deaf, blind, and have low vision. […]

Twitter Reveals New Rules to Combat Deep Fakes before the 2020 Election

‘Deepfakes' are videos that use Artificial intelligence technology to paste a person’s face onto a different person’s body. This article talks about how Twitter is making new rules to address deep fakes and other forms of synthetic and manipulated media and acting against them. These new rules are unveiled keeping the upcoming election in mind. Politicians and celebrities are the primary targets of these deep fakes. These deep fakes can cause harm since they spread things that are not true. […]

We will write an essay sample crafted to your needs.

Technological Innovations in Sales and Marketing

Technological innovations have made sales and marketing of products to be straightforward. Currently, the introduction of order management system enabled Fosfatfree Company to make their sales, manage their customer's accounts and receive their bills. The company does this by the use of mobile phones or tablets that have the order management system. The system is simple to use, and therefore clients can log into it on their own, or they can be assisted by sales agents who then, in turn, […]

The Impact of Torrent Downloads on Digital Content Consumption

Torrent downloads have significantly reshaped digital media consumption affecting how content is distributed and accessed globally. This development has had a profound impact on the entertainment industry presenting both opportunities and challenges for content creators distributors and consumers. This essay explores the multifaceted effects of torrent downloads on the digital content ecosystem. At its essence torrenting is a peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing method that allows users to share large files efficiently. Unlike traditional downloading which relies on a single source torrenting […]

The Evolution of Apple’s MacOS: a Journey of Innovation and Integration

Macos system stands operation so as continuous precept innovation and seamless integration in borders ecosystem. Originally abandoned so as mac bones X in 2001 this remark above all care from operating systems mac antérieurs accepts architecture combined with graphic inclinations moving founded in Unix. Only from macos features tasting - his graphic arts interface a famous consumer (MISTLETOE) celebrated for his intuitional design and friendly experience. In difference from his predecessors that weighed strongly on interfaces a command rules macos […]

Google’s Web Browser: Redefining Digital Navigation

Browser of Google arrives at to the leading line of digital innovation offering to the users an integral and safe experience consideration. Google LLC develops this browser has accepted separately with his mixture of speed definiteness and central for an user design serving to the various necessities modern users to the internet. Central to the browser Google is his friendly interface. By submitting the design of supporter of minimalism and intuitional navigation he guarantees that users can easily translate a […]

Step-by-Step Guide to Setting up your Verizon Email

Setting your e-mail Verizon is a process, that provides, that can you actual to manage your reports and to remain incorporated with the facilitated direct ether. are you consumer or transitioning novice from a postal senior supplier, it step-by-step direction obligates he you through a complete process, provides the smooth setting. For beginning, you need to provide, that have you at necessary hand credentials and information. It includes your Verizon directs an e-mail, password, and, if si applicable, server settlements […]

Torrent.Films: the Cinematic Currents of Digital Culture

In the vast ocean of digital culture, torrents are the currents that carry the cinematic treasures of our time. They represent a decentralized network of distribution, where films flow freely, transcending geographical boundaries and traditional modes of consumption. But beyond the surface of convenience lies a complex ecosystem, where legal, ethical, and cultural currents collide. Torrents, for better or worse, have democratized access to cinema. They've dismantled the barriers of entry, allowing anyone with an internet connection to dive into […]

The Zimmerman Telegram and its Echoes in Modern Cyber Espionage

In the shadowy corridors of global diplomacy and espionage, few incidents have resonated through history with the impact of the Zimmerman Telegram. This document, which became the catalyst for the United States' entry into World War I, parallels strikingly with today's issues of cybersecurity and international intrigue. By weaving the tale of this century-old diplomatic gambit with the modern-day challenges of cyber espionage, we can uncover lessons that are as relevant now as they were in 1917. The Zimmerman Telegram […]

Digital Frontiers: the Evolution of Cyberspace and its Impact on Society

In the unfolding narrative of progress, cyberspace emerges as an ever-expanding canvas, weaving a narrative of connectivity that transcends the boundaries of physical reality. This exploration delves into the dynamic evolution of cyberspace, unraveling its intricate journey and examining the profound footprint it leaves on the fabric of society. The inception of this digital frontier traces back to the embryonic stages of the internet—a modest experiment that has burgeoned into a sprawling ecosystem. Cyberspace is not merely a virtual realm; […]

Guardians of the Virtual Realm: Securing Cyberspace in the Digital Age

In the expansive digital landscape of the 21st century, a league of guardians rises to the forefront, shouldering the responsibility of securing cyberspace in an era defined by its digital prowess. Amid the interconnected web that defines our online existence, these Guardians of the Virtual Realm emerge as the unsung heroes, diligently working to fortify the foundations of our digital world and shield it from the relentless onslaught of cyber threats. The Digital Age, marked by unprecedented connectivity, has given […]

Dynamics of Cyberspace: Exploring its Evolution, Challenges, and Implications

Cyberspace, a term coined by science fiction writer William Gibson in his 1984 novel "Neuromancer," has evolved into a multifaceted domain that intersects with various aspects of contemporary life. This essay aims to elucidate the complexities surrounding cyberspace, examining its historical evolution, emerging challenges, and profound implications for society. First and foremost, understanding cyberspace necessitates acknowledging its conceptualization as a virtual environment facilitated by interconnected computer networks. Initially conceived as a platform for information exchange and communication, cyberspace has since […]

Bridging Minds and Machines: the Evolution of Neuro-Cybernetic Interfaces

In the ever-evolving landscape of technological innovation, one frontier stands out as both promising and challenging: the integration of neuro-cybernetic interfaces. This cutting-edge field seeks to establish a seamless connection between the human mind and cyberspace, unlocking a realm of possibilities that once existed solely in the realm of science fiction. The essence of neuro-cybernetic interfaces lies in their capacity to merge the intricacies of the human brain with the vast capabilities of the digital world. At its core, this […]

Cyberspace Decoding GTEFCU’s Secure Online Access

In the expansive realm of cyberspace, where the intricate dance between users and digital platforms unfolds, the Generic Technology Employees Federal Credit Union (GTEFCU) emerges as a sentinel, fiercely guarding the sanctity of online access. Navigating through the virtual labyrinth, an exploration of GTEFCU's approach to cybersecurity unveils a tapestry of ingenuity, weaving together an array of sophisticated measures to fortify its members' digital presence. GTEFCU's dedication to ensuring secure online access is not merely a perfunctory exercise; it's a […]

Cyberspace Simplified: Navigating Bealls Credit Card Login with Ease

Alright, let’s break it down. You’ve got your Bealls credit card, and you’re ready to step into the online realm. It’s like opening the door to your financial wizardry, and I’m here to guide you through it, no techno-babble, just straight talk. Managing your card online is like having a mini financial control center right in your pocket – and trust me, it's simpler than assembling IKEA furniture. First off, if you’re just dipping your toes into Bealls' online waters, […]

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Digital Policy Hub
• Freedom of Thought
• Global AI Risks Initiative
• Supporting a Safer Internet
• Global Economic Scenarios
• Waterloo Security Dialogue
• Conference Reports
• Essay Series
• Policy Briefs
• Publication Series
• Special Reports
• Media Relations
• Opinion Series
• Big Tech Podcast
• Annual Report
• CIGI Campus
• Staff Directory
• Strategy and Evaluation
• The CIGI Rule
• Privacy Notice

Cybersecurity and Outer Space

Foreword: is the earth’s orbit becoming a lawless frontier, securing the new space domain: an introduction, the importance of satellites to life on earth.

Where Outer Space Meets Cyberspace: A Human-Centric Look at Space Security

The five eyes and space: a new frontier for an old intelligence alliance, responding to the cybersecurity challenges of the new space environment, the strategic military importance of the space domain, the growth of the space economy and new cyber vulnerabilities, the human role in cybersecurity vulnerabilities, the cyber counterspace threat: coming out of the shadows, commercial space operators on the digital battlefield, formulating, interpreting and applying international law in space, cyberproofing india’s space assets, international humanitarian law in the “grey zone” of space and cyber, cyberwarfare blurs line between civilian and military targets, the ungoverned space of us space-cyber governance, the cyber phantom menace to space security, cybersecurity of space infrastructure and space sustainability: japan’s view, space and cyber global governance: a view from the global south, chinese thinking on the space-cyber nexus, nato versus non-kinetic threats: implications and opportunities.

This essay is part of Cybersecurity and Outer Space , an essay series that explores space governance through three themes: space security and risk, international governance challenges, and global perspectives and the pursuit of inclusivity.

Kinetic weapons capabilities and the debris clouds they create have long dominated news headlines and space diplomacy. Such capabilities and consequences have also long been key considerations of space security. Our current understanding of space security, pioneered by the Space Security Index report two decades ago, can be defined as the safe, “secure and sustainable access to, and use of, space and freedom from space-based threats” (West 2019, v); this concept emphasizes the security of outer space as a distinct environment that is to be preserved for the safe, sustainable and secure use by all humans.

Much has changed in the last 20 years. Not only has the use of outer space flourished around the world, but the technology that allows the use of outer space has developed rapidly, often with unpredictable effects. The intersection between space-based technology and cyberspace (the space-cyber nexus) is at the heart of both.

For example, satellites increasingly participate in cyberspace, which is the internet’s virtual platform for communication and information. Tens of thousands of new satellites are expected to bring broadband internet and other digital connectivity services to billions of people around the world, signalling an unprecedented era of access to and use of both space and cyberspace.

At the same time, space systems — networks of satellites, ground stations, computer systems, software and end users — are increasingly vulnerable to cyber intrusions that target these systems, which collect, transmit, use and control the flow of data, as well as the data itself. Such vulnerability to cyber interference is significant, with the list of cyber incidents against satellite systems growing. 1

Humans are both more dependent on space assets and more vulnerable to disruptions of those assets than ever before. So, while space security is increasingly valuable and relevant, its achievement is complicated by the space-cyber nexus.

This essay examines the safe, secure and sustainable use of space from the perspective of the context of the evolving space-cyber nexus. The implications are far from simple. Greater digital inclusion and access to space juxtapose benefits and value for civilians who gain new access to essential services with new threats to international peace and security, complications for operational safety and the need for an expanded view of sustainability. Ultimately, cyber connections bind Earth more closely to outer space. Thus, it is no longer sufficient to view space security as the security of a discrete location that is distinct from Earth. Our new reality demands a shift to a more Earth- and human-centric view that accounts for the vulnerabilities not only of outer space but of the people on Earth who use space assets.

The Hot-War Risk of Hybrid Threats

Space is increasingly viewed by militaries as a domain of warfighting. Key targets of space warfare are the lines of communication that transmit information and maintain the command and control (C2) of weapons systems, which are highly vulnerable to cyberattacks (United States Government Accountability Office 2021).

Cyber capabilities, less subjected to the physics of space warfare, can be used to conduct distributed attacks across an entire system, or multiple systems at once. But a big part of their appeal is that they do not go boom. Operating in the virtual realm, their use is often discreet. Although cyberattacks can cause large-scale disruption and even permanent damage to satellite systems, more often the harm inflicted is temporary, reversible and has limited impact on the environment (Rajagopalan 2019). Thus, the use of cyber counterspace capabilities is viewed as less escalatory than an attack by kinetic counterparts (Lonergan and Yarhi-Milo 2022).

Yet the effects of cyberattacks are far from benign: there is a real risk that their use could quickly escalate to a hot war or some other unpredictable disaster. In part, this is because the use of cyber capabilities is viewed as permissible in situations in which kinetic weapons are not. Tabletop exercises and simulations have shown that while there is reluctance to strike first kinetically, this same restraint does not limit the use of cyber capabilities (Secure World Foundation and Center for Strategic & International Studies 2017). The US military reports dealing with “reversible” (including cyber) attacks every day (Rogin 2021). But the very useability of such weapons introduces added dangers.

Cyber interference is difficult to detect, difficult to distinguish from unintentional or natural sources of satellite interference, and difficult to attribute to specific actors. And the fact that cyber capabilities are wielded not only by states but by non-state actors, including “hacktivists” or cyber vigilantes, only makes differentiating among perpetrators and intentions more difficult. Together, these factors make denials by perpetrators hard to disprove and increase the risks of miscommunication, misinformation and misperception that can drive conflict escalation in unpredictable and potentially dangerous ways.

Further compounding the risk is considerable uncertainty about the dynamics of conflict and escalation in space. US defence policy clearly states that the Department of Defense “has limited operational experience with conflict beginning in or extending into space” (US Department of Defense 2020, 4). And yet another layer of complexity is added by potential adversaries with the different conceptions of conflict escalation. For example, Russian officials have indicated that some types of cyberattack on satellites might be a cause for war. But the threshold is not well defined. There are real dangers that efforts to signal deterrence or test an adversary could have adverse effects.

Of particular concern is the potential vulnerability of nuclear weapons systems. Today, more than 13,000 nuclear warheads remain on Earth. Most are kept on high alert for rapid launch. Not only could they be used to respond to an actual kinetic or cyberattack on key assets in space, but they could also be used in cases of perceived or imminent nuclear attack. Critically, the systems for command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance — which include real-time monitoring and early warning of missile launches and possible nuclear attacks — run through space.

Even when nukes are not part of the question, the consequences of cyberattacks could be escalatory military confrontations that begin in space but ultimately lead to war on Earth.

Interference — intentional or not — with these systems could cause confusion and inadvertent escalation, not least because interference with these systems is commonly viewed as a prelude to nuclear war (Acton and MacDonald 2021). Thus, any interference with the systems of nuclear C2 would create immense pressure to react pre-emptively. And because cyber activity against satellite systems is becoming so common, there is also a risk that benign sources of system malfunction could be misjudged.

Current extended nuclear deterrence strategies add to the risk. Both the United States and Russia claim to be willing to use nuclear weapons in response to “significant” non-nuclear threats, including a cyberattack (Klare 2019). For this reason, an escalation to nuclear war has been called “the biggest cyber risk in Ukraine” (Schneider 2022).

Space Safety Gets More Complicated

The space-cyber nexus complicates efforts to achieve safe space operations, particularly of commercial satellites, which tend to be more vulnerable than military assets.

To date, space safety has focused on avoiding collisions in flight and damage from hazards in the space environment, such as orbital debris. Certainly, the space-cyber nexus will have a growing impact on these concerns. The expansion into space of the hardware of cyberspace — seen in the proliferation of massive constellations of satellites by companies such as SpaceX, Amazon, OneWeb and GalaxySpace — increases human access to space and cyber systems but also significantly increases the risk that satellites will collide and create catastrophic amounts of debris.

We must also consider the ways in which cyber capabilities could be used deliberately to harm both military and commercial satellites. It is feasible that cyber intrusions could allow satellites to be taken over and turned into projectiles that crash into other satellites (Akoto 2020). It is also possible that such intrusions would disable targeted satellites or cause secondary damage to render such systems unusable. An example of this occurred in 1998, when hackers took over the German ROSAT astronomy satellite and aimed its solar panels at the sun, overcharging and ultimately killing the satellite. Dead satellites then continue to pose safety risks to other objects and operators on orbit and can produce or turn into debris.

But the likeliest risk to space assets is earthbound: attacks that target computer systems on ground infrastructure, resulting in denial of service or information theft. Such attacks would put at risk not only actors who have assets in space, but also any actor linked to space through the shift to cloud computing, which sends data over vast distances via satellite (Brooks 2022).

These attacks are hard to prevent because the threats are constantly changing and the points of vulnerability are many, including not only computer systems and software, but also the complex web of components, services and providers that are the hallmark of satellite system supply chains. The multiple vendors required to supply components and assemble and integrate a satellite provide a variety of access points and opportunities for a hacker to compromise the hardware and/or software (Shadbolt 2021). The scope is even wider when the vast number of data and service providers linked to space systems is considered. Insider threats such as employee breaches are one more point of weakness (Lewis, Moloney and Ussery 2021).

Thus, we see that the risks to space operations and the remit of safety extend beyond space flight and safety in space to include ground stations and equipment, supply chains and safety of data. Daily concerns of space operators include “secure access management, secure execution environments, enhanced data encryption, and smart validation and authentication between sensors, gateways, and the software orchestration platform” (Inmarsat 2019, para. 6).

There are also safety risks to individual system users, who can be exposed to harm from cyber incidents and crimes such as data theft (Sharland et al. 2021). While access to cyber and digital platforms can enable greater inclusion and empowerment, these platforms are also sources of digital vulnerability and can cause significant harm to communities and individuals. Those that are more vulnerable are at increased risk; the internet is a key site of violence and discrimination against women, girls, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning and other sexualities (Broadband Commission for Digital Development 2015). These vulnerabilities to residents of Earth must also be considered consequences of the space-cyber nexus.

Space governance is a huge topic, and there’s a lot happening. Watch @JessicaWestPhD discuss in this video, and learn more by exploring our latest essay series on the topic: https://t.co/AsadnLYcJ7 pic.twitter.com/2X0nGt75kn — CIGI (@CIGIonline) February 2, 2023

An Expanded View of Sustainability

Typically focused on such physical components of the space environment as orbital debris, space sustainability relates to the ability of humans to use outer space for peaceful purposes today and in the future. While this perspective on sustainability remains a pressing concern, the space-cyber nexus also requires an expanded view of sustainable use.

Increasingly, space is being used to provide critical services linked to cyberspace, such as broadband internet connectivity, to a broader segment of humanity, including underserved communities with persistently poor or no access to digital technologies (although there is some debate about the extent of this access). But achieving this goal through the use of large constellations of satellites in low-Earth orbit raises questions not only about safety but also about sustainability, including orbital carrying capacity and the potential for significant debris clouds if satellites collide (European Space Policy Institute 2022).

These constellations also raise important questions about who is included in the concept of sustainability. Growing congestion in space presents a direct challenge to the sustainable use of space by future actors. Today, only a few countries and private companies make intense use of orbital space. Will all actors, particularly developing countries that do not yet have many satellites, have equal access in the days to come? Will there be room for their satellites? The present configuration in space blatantly leaves out many, in particular “the world’s most minoritized communities, including Indigenous communities” (Venkatesan et al. 2020, 1043).

And let us not forget astronomers, who have monitored outer space for millennia, but now find that the reflective light from many thousands of satellites essentially “photobombs” astronomical images and impedes observation (Witze 2020).

There is growing awareness that the human cost of any war in space would be devastating on many levels.

On the other side of the nexus, the discussed vulnerabilities to cyber counterspace capabilities raise new challenges for the sustainable use of outer space by humans. It is hard to overstate the extent to which daily life on Earth is dependent on space systems. From banking to transportation to communication, weather forecasting, agriculture, mining, electricity grids, the internet and the movement of goods around the world, human lives depend on the physical hardware that populates outer space and the links provided by computer systems, data and ground-based hardware.

There is growing awareness that the human cost of any war in space would be devastating on many levels (International Committee of the Red Cross 2021). But seemingly minor disruptions to space systems could also result in crippling harm to human infrastructure and daily lives. Because space, cyber and data systems are so deeply interconnected, even a relatively targeted disruption of a satellite system could spread rapidly through vast networks that serve multiple types of users and spill over to unintended targets and citizens. For example, a Russian cyberattack on Viasat terminals in March 2022 targeted Ukrainian military C2 capabilities, but millions of other internet users also lost connectivity (see Laetitia Cesari’s essay in this series). The hacking of Global Navigation Satellite Systems capabilities, which serve billions of people across all sectors of society, has already had an impact on critical civilian infrastructure such as commercial airline service.

Such ripple effects are bound to become more widespread and common with the rise of the Internet of Things (IoT), which creates complex webs of connected computing devices, machines, data, objects and people. Space systems are a central IoT component.

Also worrying is the potential for the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure. The world is already witnessing a growing number of cyberattacks on public services such as hospitals and other elements of health infrastructure (Skahill and West 2021).

Once again, vulnerability is not equally shared. Commercial and civilian satellites are generally more vulnerable than those operated by the military. Services that rely on older legacy systems are more vulnerable than services from newly created capabilities. And, while the expertise and resources required to mitigate cyber vulnerabilities of space systems are extensive, they might not be equally accessible to all operators.

As might be expected, disruption of critical infrastructure systems, including those linked to space, is not experienced equally either. Entrenched inequalities, including those related to gender, are reflected in unequal digital security and vulnerability (World Economic Forum 2022). While initiatives such as the UN Space4Women are being developed to give women better access to and use of space-based capabilities, we must also be aware that because of entrenched gender roles and biases in the design of infrastructure, women tend to be disproportionately affected by disruption or loss of access (Morgan et al. 2020). (We should note that the determination of which services are deemed critical is also related to gender.)

Because of the impacts that cyberattacks can have on civilian infrastructure and civilians themselves, there is a growing movement to develop a human-centric approach to cybersecurity (Kumar 2021). Although it seems clear after all the discussion of interconnectedness that such an approach must include the outer-space environment, recognition of space systems as critical infrastructure has been slow in developing (The White House 2021). With the focus remaining on national security and industry users, there appears to be almost no awareness of the civilian, humanitarian and gendered significance of space-related infrastructure.

Bringing Space Security Down to Earth

At first glance, the space-cyber nexus can seem to be a highly technical, even esoteric concern. It is anything but. Unravelling just some of the connections related to the security, safety and sustainability of the use of outer space reveals an intricate web of connections between outer space and Earth’s inhabitants. Yet it is still the case that the many people who depend on outer space for essential services are often overlooked in conceptualizations of space systems. So, too, are the civilian and humanitarian impacts of security threats in space and disruptions to the use of space. But when we adopt a human-centric view of space security, we see clearly just how essential the security of outer space is to the security of Earth.

• See www.csis.org/programs/strategic-technologies-program/significant-cyber-incidents .

Works Cited

Acton, James and Thomas MacDonald. 2021. “Nuclear Command-and-Control Satellites Should Be Off Limits.” Defense One, December 10. www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/12/nuclear-command-and-control-satellites-should-be-limits/187472/ .

Akoto, William. 2020. “Hackers could shut down satellites — or turn them into weapons.” The Conversation, February 12. http://theconversation.com/hackers-could-shut-down-satellites-or-turn-them-into-weapons-130932 .

Broadband Commission for Digital Development. 2015. “Cyber Violence against Women and Girls: A Worldwide Wake-Up Call.” Discussion Paper. October. www.broadbandcommission.org/Documents/reports/bb-wg-gender-discussionpaper2015-executive-summary.pdf .

Brooks, Chuck. 2022. “The Urgency To Cyber-Secure Space Assets.” Forbes , February 27. www.forbes.com/sites/chuckbrooks/2022/02/27/the-urgency-to-cyber-secure-space-assets/ .

European Space Policy Institute. 2022. Space Environment Capacity: Policy, regulatory and diplomatic perspectives on threshold-based models for space safety & sustainability . Report 82. Vienna, Austria: European Space Policy Institute. www.espi.or.at/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/ESPI-Report-82-Space-Environment-Capacity-Full-Report.pdf .

Inmarsat. 2019. “Global Supply Chain Vulnerable to Cybersecurity Risks by Failing to Secure Their Industrial IoT Deployments.” Press release, January 31. www.inmarsat.com/en/news/latest-news/enterprise/2019/global-supply-chain-vulnerable-to-cybersecurity-risks-by-failing-to-secure-their-industrial-iot-deployments.html .

International Committee of the Red Cross. 2021. “The Potential Human Cost of the Use of Weapons in Outer Space and the Protection Afforded by International Humanitarian Law.” Position paper submitted by the International Committee of the Red Cross to the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the issues outlined in General Assembly Resolution 75/36. https://front.un-arm.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/icrc-position-paper-unsg-on-resolution-A-75-36-final-eng.pdf .

Klare, Michael T. 2019. “Cyber Battles, Nuclear Outcomes? Dangerous New Pathways to Escalation.” Arms Control Association. November. www.armscontrol.org/act/2019-11/features/cyber-battles-nuclear-outcomes-dangerous-new-pathways-escalation .

Kumar, Sheetal. 2021. “The missing piece in human-centric approaches to cybernorms implementation: the role of civil society.” Journal of Cyber Policy 6 (3): 375–93. https://doi.org.10.1080/23738871.2021.1909090 .

Lewis, Dan, Megan Moloney and Nicole Ussery. 2021. “SOS Space: Why cybersecurity and supply chain risk management must go hand in hand.” SpaceNews, November 16. https://spacenews.com/op-ed-sos-space-why-cybersecurity-and-supply-chain-risk-management-must-go-hand-in-hand/ .

Lonergan, Erica and Keren Yarhi-Milo. 2022. “Cyber Signaling and Nuclear Deterrence: Implications for the Ukraine Crisis.” War on the Rocks, April 21. https://warontherocks.com/2022/04/cyber-signaling-and-nuclear-deterrence-implications-for-the-ukraine-crisis/ .

Morgan, G., A. Bajpai, P. Ceppi, A. Al-Hinai, T. Christensen, S. Kumar, S. Crosskey and N. O’Regan. 2020. Infrastructure for gender equality and the empowerment of women . Copenhagen, Denmark: United Nations Office for Project Services. https://content.unops.org/publications/UNOPS-Infrastructure-for-Gender-Equality-and-the-Empowerment-of-women.pdf .

Rajagopalan, Rajeswari Pillai. 2019. “Electronic and Cyber Warfare in Outer Space.” Space Dossier 3. United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. https://unidir.org/sites/default/files/publication/pdfs/electronic-and-cyber-warfare-in-outer-space-en-784.pdf .

Rogin, Josh. 2021. “A shadow war in space is heating up fast.” The Washington Post , November 30. www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/30/space-race-china-david-thompson/ .

Schneider, Jacquelyn. 2022. “The Biggest Cyber Risk in Ukraine? How Russian Hacking Could Threaten Nuclear Stability.” Foreign Affairs , March 7. www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/2022-03-07/biggest-cyber-risk-ukraine .

Secure World Foundation and Center for Strategic & International Studies. 2017. Space Crisis Dynamics and Uncertainty Tabletop Exercise Summary Report . February 7. https://swfound.org/media/205726/ttx_report_7feb2017.pdf .

Shadbolt, Luke. 2021. “Technical Study: Satellite Cyberattacks and Security.” White Paper. London, UK: HDI Global Specialty SE. www.hdi.global/infocenter/insights/specialty/technical-study/ .

Sharland, Lisa, Netta Goussac, Emilia Currey, Genevieve Feely and Sarah O’Connor. 2021. System Update: Towards a Women, Peace and Cybersecurity Agenda. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. https://unidir.org/sites/default/files/2021-09/UNIDIR_System_Update.pdf .

Skahill, Emily and Darrell M. West. 2021. “Why hospitals and healthcare organizations need to take cybersecurity more seriously.” TechTank (blog), August 9. www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2021/08/09/why-hospitals-and-healthcare-organizations-need-to-take-cybersecurity-more-seriously/ .

The White House. 2021. “United States Space Priorities Framework.” December. www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/united-states-space-priorities-framework-_-december-1-2021.pdf .

United States Government Accountability Office. 2021. Weapon System Cybersecurity: Guidance Would Help DOD Programs Better Communicate Requirements to Contractors . GAO-21-179. March. Washington, DC: United States Government Accountability Office. www.gao.gov/assets/gao-21-179.pdf .

US Department of Defense. 2020. “Defense Space Strategy Summary.” US Department of Defense. June. https://media.defense.gov/2020/Jun/17/2002317391/-1/-1/1/2020_DEFENSE_SPACE_STRATEGY_SUMMARY.PDF .

Venkatesan, Aparna, James Lowenthal, Parvathy Prem and Monica Vidaurri. 2020. “The impact of satellite constellations on space as an ancestral global commons.” Nature Astronomy 4 (11): 1043–48. https://doi.org.10.1038/s41550-020-01238-3 .

West, Jessica, ed. 2019. Space Security Index 2019 . 16th ed. Waterloo, ON: Project Ploughshares. https://spacesecurityindex.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/SSI2019ExecutiveSummaryCompressed.pdf .

Witze, Alexandra. 2020. “How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images.” Nature , August 26. https://doi.org.10.1038/d41586-020-02480-5 .

World Economic Forum. 2022. “Digital Dependencies and Cyber Vulnerabilities.” In The Global Risks Report 2022 , 45–56. 17th ed. www.weforum.org/reports/global-risks-report-2022/in-full/chapter-3-digital-dependencies-and-cyber-vulnerabilities/ .

The opinions expressed in this article/multimedia are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of CIGI or its Board of Directors.

Recommended

• National Security
• Platform Governance

Digital Regulation May Have Bolstered European Elections — but How Would We Know?

• Heidi Tworek

In 2024, National Security Requires a Whole-of-Society Approach

• Kyle Hiebert

• Space Governance

Are We Prepared for the New Era of Spacefaring?

• Daniel Munro

What Is Foreign Interference, Beyond the Headlines?

• Wesley Wark
• Geopolitics

AI Populism Roils a Fragile International Order

• Clifford Young
• Surveillance & Privacy

How Allies Do It: Five Eyes Foreign Influence Transparency Registries

• Surveillance
• Transformative Technologies

UN Cybercrime Convention: Authoritarian Push, or a Boost for Developing Countries?

• Artificial Intelligence

⿻數位 Plurality: The Future of Collaborative Technology and Democracy

• E. Glen Weyl
• Paul Samson

Canada’s New Defence Policy Marks a Shift in Strategic Thinking

Clearing the fog: the grey zones of space governance.

• Jessica West
• Jordan Miller

Canada’s Uncertain Future in a Multipolar World

• Nikolina Zivkovic

As Space Exploration Takes Off, Governance Struggles for Lift

• Valerie Oosterveld

The Cyberspace Behaviour of People Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Computers nowadays are being ubiquitous. Almost everyone uses it whenever and wherever they are. And because humans are social beings, they devised ways of connecting with other people through this ubiquitous equipment. This has become the birth of the internet.

These computers are used in a variety of ways, in businesses, at home, while traveling, at school, and in other places. The internet connection has already become a very powerful tool for business institutions. With it, the internet connection helped the organization know their employees more, helping them assess the working efficiency of each of the employees. The internet is a group of so-called protocols which make it capable of doing different functions like information access using the World Wide Web, relay messages like e-mails, and/or file transfers and transactions (Clarke, 1999).

Thus, through the internet, cyberspace has been one of the most rapidly growing technology and medium of communication through computer technologies. It is commonly used by students for their researches, and businessmen likewise. Online processing of data makes it easier, faster, and more convenient to use among people in terms of communicating with others and relating with them.

Considering those in business fields, most organizations or corporations consider using this computer technology. Because it is cost-efficient in different ways such as posting new ads or new job offers via the internet and other different purposes like keeping track of their workers.

Privacy in workplaces is important because it helps improve a good atmosphere among co-workers and it also helps build a better business sense. Though privacy can be positive in some sense, some still see it as a means of covering up or hiding what should be exposed for inspections or scrutiny (Posner, 1978). Therefore, every individual should have his or her private space. In this way, the person could be free and able to do things at his own pace and comfort.

But on the contrary, organizations tend to use surveillance among employees in their workplace. From this, the concept of ethics comes up. The idea of ethics in any field is formed because of one basic question, “Would you want the things you do to others to be also done to you?”. This is the question that every ethical framework is expected to answer.

Regarding the main question, “Is it ethical that employers monitor their employees, more specifically, their e-mails?” it should also be asked if they should be doing this in the first place.

In the viewpoint of the employers, monitoring their employee’s email activities would be a kind of protection; not only to their company’s security but also preventing any virtual attacks on their system as well (Introna, 2000). It could also be seen as keeping a log about what information comes in and what goes out of the company system. The action could prevent dishonest employees from sharing company information with other people. This could also be an act to prevent the system’s IP address from being spread on the net.

But the said action could also entail that the employers would be invading their personnels’ personal space, as well as their privacy while working. This would mean that they would be virtually manipulating the working efficiency of the employees, whether positively or negatively.

It is more possible that there would also arise some problems about their employees’ performance because there are people whose work efficiency increases when they are monitored, but there are also people that cannot function well whenever they know that someone is watching their actions. And if this is the case, the “preventive” act of the employers could endanger the company’s production.

On the other side of the coin, employees also have a say about the issue, because they are the ones that do the production. Their efficiency depends on many factors, and one of these is the company’s ability to provide them a healthy working environment. They need appropriate working stations, as well as working equipment. They are also people who need privacy while working.

Employees have the right to privacy too. In this way, the employer should also respect his or her employee. To be able to keep harmony and balance among employer-employee relationships, they could consider some rules in order to establish as well as maintain balance in their workplace. These rules could involve, (1) employers telling his or her employees why he needs information about them, (2) informed consent for the employees part when his or her personal information would be used, (3) employers are only to collect necessary personal information and to do it fairly and by lawful means, (4) the employee’s personal information should be updated, complete and accurate, and, (5) employees should be able to access their data and be able to change or update it (Canada, 2004).

Before employers can monitor or even access information about their employees, they should first tell the employee why the information is needed (Canada, 2004). When an employer wants to get information about an employee, like the person’s online information such as the username, email logs and password, and personal information like credit card number, birthday, etc. he/she must first ask for permission before doing so.

Also, they are expected not to use the said information for any other purposes except for the one mentioned in the letter of permission. Using this information may endanger an employee’s identity, so employers are also expected to keep the information as classified as possible. Employers can only access their employees’ email logs and emails, if and only if their employees give them access to them.

Employers, especially those that own the organization, are in a sense, an owner of an employee’s work because it is what they are paying them for. But regarding the nature of the labor itself, only the employee owns everything that he/she does. Because of this, only the employee has the right to choose which information can be seen accessed by the employer, and which of those could not be.

Because organizations should be bound by the Law, they should also use legal ways of acquiring information from their employees. They should have dialogs between and among them before getting the information.

The issue about employers monitoring their employees while they work would not only be an issue of privacy in the workplace but also in a sense, an issue of violation of the intellectual property rights of the employee. Everyone has his / her own way of doing and accomplishing things. When workers are closely monitored by their authorities, their own way of working is in danger of being copied and potentially owned by the organization, taken that the worker has an exceptional, highly efficient, and unique way of working.

But taking the instance from another point of view, it would be beneficial not only to the company but also to other workers. This is because it would be one way of keeping the business alive, which in turn keeps the workers in their jobs, which means they would still be financially stable.

Using a utilitarian ethical framework, it would be better if employers would not monitor their workers, because it would not only save them money and efforts but also would keep the morale of the workers and the public high towards the company. When authorities monitor its workers’ moves, it would spell disaster to the company because the consumers would lose faith in it because they may assume that the company is experiencing some problems with its production. it may also be assumed that the quality of their products is relatively low, which could cause lesser sales, which would ultimately cause bankruptcy.

Employers should trust their employees because they are the life of the company. When they lose morale, the company would also suffer.

• Privacy in the Workplace (2004). Fact Sheet . Office of the privacy commissioner of Canada.
• Clarke, R. (1999). Ethics and the Internet: The Cyberspace Behaviour of People, Communities and Organisations.
• Introna, L. (2000). Workplace: Surveillance, Privacy and Distributive Justice. Computers and Society. 30, 4, pp. 33-39.
• Posner, R. (1978). The Right to Privacy. Georgia Law Revie w. 12:283-422.
• Concept and Problem of Cyber Domain in US
• Cybercrime: Criminal Threats From Cyberspace
• Types of Crime in Cyberspace
• The Internet: Arguments Against and for It
• Will Modern Technology, Such as the Internet Ever Replace the Book or the Written Word as the Main Source of Information?
• Network Management Importance Analysis
• The Role of Internet in Formation of Popular Culture
• Effects of Files Sharing to the Sale of CDs
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, September 12). The Cyberspace Behaviour of People. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-cyberspace-behaviour-of-people/

"The Cyberspace Behaviour of People." IvyPanda , 12 Sept. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/the-cyberspace-behaviour-of-people/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'The Cyberspace Behaviour of People'. 12 September.

IvyPanda . 2021. "The Cyberspace Behaviour of People." September 12, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-cyberspace-behaviour-of-people/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Cyberspace Behaviour of People." September 12, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-cyberspace-behaviour-of-people/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Cyberspace Behaviour of People." September 12, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-cyberspace-behaviour-of-people/.

Cyber Security Essay for Students and Children

Cyber security essay.

Cybersecurity means protecting data, networks, programs and other information from unauthorized or unattended access, destruction or change. In today’s world, cybersecurity is very important because of some security threats and cyber-attacks. For data protection, many companies develop software. This software protects the data. Cybersecurity is important because not only it helps to secure information but also our system from virus attack. After the U.S.A. and China, India has the highest number of internet users.

Cyber Threats

It can be further classified into 2 types. Cybercrime – against individuals, corporates, etc.and Cyberwarfare – against a state.

Cyber Crime

Use of cyberspace, i.e. computer, internet, cellphone, other technical devices, etc., to commit a crime by an individual or organized group is called cyber-crime. Cyber attackers use numerous software and codes in cyberspace to commit cybercrime. They exploit the weaknesses in the software and hardware design through the use of malware. Hacking is a common way of piercing the defenses of protected computer systems and interfering with their functioning. Identity theft is also common.

Cybercrimes may occur directly i.e,  targeting the computers directly by spreading computer viruses. Other forms include DoS attack. It is an attempt to make a machine or network resource unavailable to its intended users. It suspends services of a host connected to the internet which may be temporary or permanent.

Malware is a software used to disrupt computer operation, gather sensitive information, or gain access to private computer systems. It usually appears in the form of code, scripts, active content, and other software. ‘Malware’ refers to a variety of forms of hostile or intrusive software, for example, Trojan Horses, rootkits, worms, adware, etc.

Another way of committing cybercrime is independent of the Computer Network or Device. It includes Economic frauds. It is done to destabilize the economy of a country, attack on banking security and transaction system, extract money through fraud, acquisition of credit/debit card data, financial theft, etc.

Hinder the operations of a website or service through data alteration, data destruction. Others include using obscene content to humiliate girls and harm their reputation, Spreading pornography, threatening e-mail, assuming a fake identity, virtual impersonation. Nowadays misuse of social media in creating intolerance, instigating communal violence and inciting riots is happening a lot.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Cyber Warfare

Snowden revelations have shown that Cyberspace could become the theatre of warfare in the 21st century. Future wars will not be like traditional wars which are fought on land, water or air. when any state initiates the use of internet-based invisible force as an instrument of state policy to fight against another nation, it is called cyberwar’.

It includes hacking of vital information, important webpages, strategic controls, and intelligence. In December 2014 the cyberattack a six-month-long cyberattack on the German parliament for which the Sofacy Group is suspected. Another example 2008 cyberattack on US Military computers. Since these cyber-attacks, the issue of cyber warfare has assumed urgency in the global media.

Inexpensive Cybersecurity Measures

• The simplest thing you can do to up your security and rest easy at night knowing your data is safe is to change your passwords.
• You should use a password manager tool like LastPass, Dashlane, or Sticky Password to keep track of everything for you. These applications help you to use unique, secure passwords for every site you need while also keeping track of all of them for you.
• An easy way for an attacker to gain access to your network is to use old credentials that have fallen by the wayside. Hence delete unused accounts.
• Enabling two-factor authentication to add some extra security to your logins. An extra layer of security that makes it harder for an attacker to get into your accounts.
• Keep your Softwares up to date.

Today due to high internet penetration, cybersecurity is one of the biggest need of the world as cybersecurity threats are very dangerous to the country’s security. Not only the government but also the citizens should spread awareness among the people to always update your system and network security settings and to the use proper anti-virus so that your system and network security settings stay virus and malware-free.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• Opportunities
• Free Speech
• Creativity and Innovation
• Transparency
• International
• Deeplinks Blog
• Press Releases
• Legal Cases
• Whitepapers
• Annual Reports
• Action Center
• Electronic Frontier Alliance
• Privacy Badger
• Surveillance Self-Defense
• Atlas of Surveillance
• Cover Your Tracks
• Crocodile Hunter
• Street Level Surveillance
• Donate to EFF
• Giving Societies
• Other Ways to Give
• Membership FAQ

Search form

• Copyright (CC BY)
• Privacy Policy

A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace

John Perry Barlow Library

• Decrypting the Puzzle Palace
• A Not Terribly Brief History of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
• A Plain Text on Crypto Policy
• A Pretty Bad Problem
• Across the Electronic Frontier
• Barlow in Rockspace
• Barlow, Denning on the Clipper Chip scheme
• Being in Nothingness
• Complete ACM Columns Collection
• Crime and Puzzlement
• Cynthia Horner's Eulogy
• Go Placidly Amidst the Noise and Haste
• Is There a There in Cyberspace?
• J. Kreilsberg-Barlow interview
• Jack In, Young Pioneer!
• Jackboots on the Infobahn: Clipping the Wings of Freedom
• Just Say Yes
• Leaving the Physical World
• Mitch Kapor & John Barlow Interview
• Passing the Buck on Porn
• Selling Wine Without Bottles: The Economy of Mind on the Global Net
• Songs for the Dead
• Stopping the Information Railroad
• TV, LSD, and Life in the Country
• The Economy of Ideas (Wired Magazine)
• The Pursuit of Emptiness: Why Americans Have Never Been A Happy Bunch
• The View from the Brooklyn Bridge
• Thinking locally, acting globally
• Through Many Panes of Shattered Glass
• To Be At Liberty
• Verbum Magazine Interview
• Who Holds The Keys?

Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather.

We have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one, so I address you with no greater authority than that with which liberty itself always speaks. I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear.

Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. You have neither solicited nor received ours. We did not invite you. You do not know us, nor do you know our world. Cyberspace does not lie within your borders. Do not think that you can build it, as though it were a public construction project. You cannot. It is an act of nature and it grows itself through our collective actions.

You have not engaged in our great and gathering conversation, nor did you create the wealth of our marketplaces. You do not know our culture, our ethics, or the unwritten codes that already provide our society more order than could be obtained by any of your impositions.

You claim there are problems among us that you need to solve. You use this claim as an excuse to invade our precincts. Many of these problems don't exist. Where there are real conflicts, where there are wrongs, we will identify them and address them by our means. We are forming our own Social Contract. This governance will arise according to the conditions of our world, not yours. Our world is different.

Cyberspace consists of transactions, relationships, and thought itself, arrayed like a standing wave in the web of our communications. Ours is a world that is both everywhere and nowhere, but it is not where bodies live.

We are creating a world that all may enter without privilege or prejudice accorded by race, economic power, military force, or station of birth.

We are creating a world where anyone, anywhere may express his or her beliefs, no matter how singular, without fear of being coerced into silence or conformity.

Your legal concepts of property, expression, identity, movement, and context do not apply to us. They are all based on matter, and there is no matter here.

Our identities have no bodies, so, unlike you, we cannot obtain order by physical coercion. We believe that from ethics, enlightened self-interest, and the commonweal, our governance will emerge. Our identities may be distributed across many of your jurisdictions. The only law that all our constituent cultures would generally recognize is the Golden Rule. We hope we will be able to build our particular solutions on that basis. But we cannot accept the solutions you are attempting to impose.

In the United States, you have today created a law, the Telecommunications Reform Act, which repudiates your own Constitution and insults the dreams of Jefferson, Washington, Mill, Madison, DeToqueville, and Brandeis. These dreams must now be born anew in us.

You are terrified of your own children, since they are natives in a world where you will always be immigrants. Because you fear them, you entrust your bureaucracies with the parental responsibilities you are too cowardly to confront yourselves. In our world, all the sentiments and expressions of humanity, from the debasing to the angelic, are parts of a seamless whole, the global conversation of bits. We cannot separate the air that chokes from the air upon which wings beat.

In China, Germany, France, Russia, Singapore, Italy and the United States, you are trying to ward off the virus of liberty by erecting guard posts at the frontiers of Cyberspace. These may keep out the contagion for a small time, but they will not work in a world that will soon be blanketed in bit-bearing media.

Your increasingly obsolete information industries would perpetuate themselves by proposing laws, in America and elsewhere, that claim to own speech itself throughout the world. These laws would declare ideas to be another industrial product, no more noble than pig iron. In our world, whatever the human mind may create can be reproduced and distributed infinitely at no cost. The global conveyance of thought no longer requires your factories to accomplish.

These increasingly hostile and colonial measures place us in the same position as those previous lovers of freedom and self-determination who had to reject the authorities of distant, uninformed powers. We must declare our virtual selves immune to your sovereignty, even as we continue to consent to your rule over our bodies. We will spread ourselves across the Planet so that no one can arrest our thoughts.

We will create a civilization of the Mind in Cyberspace. May it be more humane and fair than the world your governments have made before.

Davos, Switzerland February 8, 1996

Back to top

Follow EFF:

Check out our 4-star rating on Charity Navigator .

• Internships
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Creativity & Innovation
• EFFector Newsletter
• Press Contact
• Join or Renew Membership Online
• One-Time Donation Online

Artificial Intelligence in Cyberspace

Introduction.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has brought forth benefits and drawbacks for cyber safety and crime. In our fast-changing world, where new ideas and crime merge, the delicate balance between threats from AI-driven machines and protection systems is very important. The growing use of digital things connected by networks is making people worried about crime using AI. The risk area has changed because AI can automate and make many parts of cyber-attacks better. Cybercriminals use many tactics like easy hacking, smart phishing, quick-changing malware, and bots driven by AI to make computer systems and networks more at risk. On the other hand, people who work with cybersecurity use AI to keep digital meta safe by finding threats, anticipating and setting up automatic ways of reacting.

Some cybersecurity experts argue a lot about the best ways to stop attacks made by artificial intelligence. The changing growth of artificial intelligence makes it hard to create the same defense strategies. There’s lots of debate about how fair or right it is to use AI in cybercrimes like deepfakes, social trickery and possible misuse of new technologies. This includes issues around the ethics involved, too. These disagreements show the need for a complete study of using AI in online areas.

AI is changing the digital threat scene, so it’s important to study how AI fits into both cybersecurity and computer crime. The experts’ discourse shows how desperately there is a need to make strong and adaptable defense systems. The discussion about the fair use of AI shows that there is a need for rules and laws to manage its use on the internet. The growing number of attacks, leaks of personal information and deceptive efforts using AI are making people worried. This shows the negative effects on society if these problems are not solved right away.

Lots of people are using AI now. This has changed how cybercriminals use computers to make cyber-attacks, breaking established cyber regulations. Automated hacking, a strong strategy shown by Kumar (2023), is leading this change. It means AI programs try to find and use weaknesses in software or systems all by themselves. Automation that lessens human involvement is a major problem for old cybersecurity systems. The main disagreement here is that there is a need to change the way defense mechanisms are set up. This new thinking should accept how fast and flexible AI-driven attacks can be all the time. It is important to understand the small details, problems and moral issues related to this integration. This will help make resistance strategies that work well, encourage teamwork between cybersecurity experts and guarantee good use of AI technology in ethical ways. The automation that does not need people to be involved makes a big problem for the old ways of keeping computers safe. The main problem is that there is a need to change our ways of defending because AI-led attacks are always fast and shifting. It is important to understand the details, problems and moral questions about this combination of AI with cybersecurity. This helps create resilient protection methods that work well and encourages teamwork between people who know computer security skills. It also makes sure these new technologies are used correctly, ethically speaking. This study aims to show how cybercrime and cybersecurity apply AI and further highlights ways of making these tech skills more sophisticated whilst focusing on the urgent need for better cybersecurity solutions.

Literature Review

AI has created new chances and problems for cybersecurity and crime that have not been seen before. This review of the literature shows how experts in cybersecurity and criminals use AI. It points out that threats from AI are getting more complicated, so there is a need to get better protection online.

AI in Cybercrime: A Threat Landscape

AI programs have made automatic hacking a normal tool in crime on the internet. Kumar’s study (2023) found that AI-powered attacks can find and use software errors with less human involvement. This is a big problem for normal cybersecurity ways. Aziz and Andriansyah stress how important AI is in making fake phishing attacks seem real (2023). AI helps hackers make fake emails that seem very personal to certain people by looking at their information, using things they like, and how they use the internet. Such complexity needs better understanding by users and enhanced email safety. AI-driven malware can learn and change to stay hidden from security software (Schmitt, 2023). To stay ahead of changing software threats, experts in security need to be responsive to handle this dynamic.

AI is crucial for making password attacks automatic and predicting what kind of passwords people will use. Machine learning makes brute force attacks more effective, but it also raises doubts about user account protection and the need for good login security. Moreover, the use of AI-made deepfakes for false information and pretending adds a new problem to attacks on social issues. It affects people’s thoughts, showing ethical challenges tied to cybercrime (Pantserev, 2020). Network security also struggles because AI-powered botnets can help carry out more advanced attacks. These include coordinated distribution denial of service (DDoS) operations, which slow down internet services and make them inaccessible to users (Xing et al., 2021).

AI is used to check lots of information. It shows patterns and weaknesses that human experts do not see. There is a need for improved systems to flag anomalies and acquire better threat intel. These are needed for smart attacks using lots of data. Using chatbots with artificial intelligence to do social engineering attacks that look like real people is a concern. There is a need for cybersecurity training and awareness programs more than ever.

AI in Cybersecurity: A Proactive Defense Approach

Threat detection and analysis.

AI systems can see patterns that point to online safety problems, which allows quick action. Also, the risk from AI-driven automated hacking is higher because it can change and adapt in real-time (Schmitt, 2023). It is getting hard for cyber safety defenses to anticipate and stop these smart, automated attacks. This is because attack methods are always changing all the time.

Predictive Security

AI helps institutions spot potential weaknesses by studying trends and patterns. This lets them be ready for threats before they happen. AI-powered predictive modeling makes cybersecurity stronger. It lets entities plan ahead to find new threats and set up safety measures before they happen. By being smart about it, the security protection against cybercrime is stronger, and they are quarantined or smothered before they can do harm.

Automated Response to Threats

Artificial intelligence helps make quick decisions and actions better by letting security patches be used automatically, stopping fake IP addresses, and separating computers that have been hacked (Kumar in 2023). Automated actions make a flexible safety setup that changes with new online attacks and learns from them. They also help lessen existing risks. By being active, a good defense system that can change with the new cyber threats is promised.

Enhancing Network Security

AI algorithms can keep an eye on network traffic. They can point out risks like DDoS attacks or attempts to get into systems without permission (Wu et al., 2020). AI systems can watch network traffic and check for trends. This helps them find tiny changes that might show future security risks. With this advanced technology, businesses can use it to actively guard their networks from changing internet security threats.

Fraud Detection

AI can spot unusual things that might be signs of fraud by looking at how money moves, making cybersecurity better in the banking world (Aziz & Andriansyah, 2023). AI’s fast study of money deals can quickly find strange activity and stop possible scams before they happen. This ability helps to cut down money losses caused by fake transactions. It also optimizes safety in the finance sector.

Phishing Prevention

Even if cybercrime gets more complicated, AI can check emails and online prints. It looks for small signs of phishing attempts that are common (Aziz & Andriansyah, 2023). Using machine learning methods shows how adaptable AI can be at spotting changing phishing tricks. With cyber threats constantly changing, these systems can learn by themselves from how things are developing.

Improving Endpoint Security

AI is very important for better security at the endpoints. It constantly checks and judges data to look for signs of bad actions or weaknesses in protecting against them. AI can quickly respond to new risks, keeping businesses safe from always-changing online threats. This forward-thinking approach makes sure we have a strong safety plan that actively stops any threats to our devices.

Biometric Authentication

AI optimizes biometric identification checking methods. This helps increase safety and get it right more often with voice recognition, fingerprint scanning, or face checks for knowing who someone is (Liang et al., 2020). To make a better and sure way to check different biometric ways, AI not only makes things more accurate but also tackles possible problems. Making sure people are who they say they are is getting more important.

Behavioral Analytics

Artificial intelligence can look at what people do to find anything strange that could be a sign of safety threats. Liang et al. (2020) agree that artificial intelligence can flag unusual user behavior. This helps identify security threats early so that cybersecurity defense systems work fast to respond quickly. To prevent security breaches and reduce them before they become worse, it is important to take a forward-thinking approach.

Security Policy Enforcement

Hassan and Ibrahim (2023) show that AI can enforce security rules, watch for compliance problems, and handle changes by itself inside businesses. Their research shows that AI is vital for a good security system. It actively checks if policies are being followed and quickly fixes any problems or differences found in them. The study highlights how important artificial intelligence is for helping companies with internet security rules.

Vulnerability Management

Spring et al. (2020) looked at how AI can help with security issues by finding flaws in systems and apps, ranking the problems based on their importance, and then giving solutions. Their aim was to study how AI can make detecting and fixing security issues in digital settings better. The research shows how AI lets us take action to lower and control any possible risks.

Security Training and Awareness

Ansari (2021) focuses on how AI is blended into learning and teaching programs. It offers personalized directions for each learner based on their position plus understanding of cybersecurity knowledge. The study looks at how AI can make cybersecurity learning more suited and adjustable. The study shows how important it is to use AI and make training programs better at teaching cybersecurity.

AI brings forth negatives and positives when it comes to online safety and crime. This discussion will look at how AI affects cybersecurity and online crime. The discussion focuses on the main results from research papers that have been studied. Lastly, the discussion will talk about different opinions and ideas based on what has been presented. It will be very important to show that a smart plan to fight against attacks using AI is needed if it is done right.

AI in Cybercrime: A Formidable Adversary

Kumar (2023) outlines that AI can do automatic hacking. This is a big danger to old cybersecurity methods. The amount of work people need to do is reduced by automatic attacks using AI. These can find and use software and system problems well. Since AI-led attacks are very fast and nimble, there is a need to change the conventional safety mechanisms. Aziz and Andriansyah’s study (2023) shows how hard it is for people to tell when they are being tricked by fake emails because AI uses tricks that look real. Phishing emails are made more dangerous by closely studying and tailoring them to people.

Schmitt (2023) discusses how the changing way AI-driven bad software works makes us question if old ways of finding it work well. Bad software always changes to hide from being caught, so we need a ready cybersecurity plan that guesses and gets rid of new dangers. The research shows that using AI to guess passwords and automatically do credential attacks brings up doubts about the safety of user accounts. AI-powered brute force attacks are becoming more effective, so moving to strong authentication methods like multiple-factor verification is needed. This will help protect against these fast incoming cyberattacks.

Pantserev (2020) argues that the use of deepfakes made with AI for manipulation gives social engineering attacks a new challenge in what is right or wrong. Along with technology safety, there is a need for a mix of strategies like laws and public education to fight the effects of deepfakes. Xing et al. (2021) discuss how AI-driven botnets are becoming more coordinated, and this is a problem for security in computer networks. The complexity of attacks managed by AI might be too much for old network defense systems to handle.

AI in Cybersecurity: A Proactive Defense Stance

Active defense uses AI systems’ ability to spot signs of cybersecurity threats, as the review mentions. A good cybersecurity plan needs flexible response systems and quick threat evaluations done right now. But, ways to spot threats need always be better due to AI-powered hacking changing all the time. The review shows how AI helps entities to know and get ready for potential safety risks before they happen. This forward-thinking method, which depends on AI’s predictive modeling to stay ahead of new cyber threats, is very important.

To quickly stop a threat, AI’s automatic response skills are very important. They make it take less time to see the danger to react against it. However, the flexibility of cyberattacks powered by AI brings a problem. It needs constant improvement in automated defense systems to effectively fight against changing attack strategies. AI helps protect network security by watching for attacks in the traffic of networks. But with today’s complicated internet setup, AI systems need to understand odd things and change how they deal with novel threats.

AI helps find money scams early, protecting the economy from online attacks. Checking quickly for problems in a real-time assessment of transaction patterns helps reduce money losses from bad actions. But, because hackers keep changing their ways, there is always a need for new methods to flag fraud. The review shows that AI is very good at stopping phishing emails, which is important for active safety. Understanding new phishing methods by AI systems is very important to stop social engineering attacks from changing all the time.

Protecting individual devices depends on AI’s critical role in improving endpoint security while keeping an eye out for indications of malicious activity. To really protect endpoint devices from potential dangers, security systems have to do more than just find them. They also need quick response tools built in. AI is making biometric checks better. This makes them more accurate and fixes mistakes, helping to make sure our identity checks are safe.

Active protection uses AI to check on what users are doing. It looks for things that seem strange, which may suggest possible safety issues. Finding security problems early helps fix them quickly and effectively. But with a threat situation that changes fast, behavioral analytics tools have to be right and adaptable in order to win. Hassan and Ibrahim (2023) concur that using AI to put security rules in place is very important for keeping a robust safety system.

Spring et al. (2020) show how effective it is to find and fix security problems by looking at the importance of AI in managing vulnerabilities. Dealing well with possible risks needs a forward-thinking approach to protecting against weaknesses. This should be based on ideas for fixing problems, which use AI power and order them in importance. Ansari (2021) shows how a plan that’s proactive and can change with the times is needed for teaching about cybersecurity in his research on using AI to raise awareness and teach people.

Position: The Imperative of Proactive and Adaptive Cybersecurity

The review shows how AI-powered cyber threats are always changing and developing. Malware avoidance, fake email attacks and automatic hacking are changing. They are getting more difficult to detect and mitigate. This change demands that cybersecurity should always be ready and constantly progressing to fight off new strikes. Since attacks using AI are so flexible, there is a need for strong protection on the internet to adapt and change while they happen. AI is very important to finding and stopping threats, but it also needs changes because cybercriminals always change their plans.

Even though AI is getting better, human control remains very important for cybersecurity. Social engineering, phishing attacks and other methods use human weak points. AI technology should be added to full user understanding and learning plans as part of being ready to protect ourselves. This means creating a mindset about internet safety and understanding the ethical side of AI in crime.

Since cyberattacks affect everyone around the world, there is a need to work together globally and make rules. Taking action involves sharing information about dangers, making universal rules for computer security and creating good values to use AI in fighting cybercrimes. These team efforts can help make a stronger response against global hacking problems.

The need for ongoing research and development is a result of the rise in AI-powered cyber threats. Governments and proactive organizations should set aside funds to develop threat intelligence capabilities, advance cybersecurity technology, and promote innovation in AI-powered defensive systems. As part of this, multidisciplinary research that examines the nexus between ethics, cybersecurity, and AI is supported.

There is a need to keep researching and developing because of the growing number of computer threats that use AI. Governments and groups that are always ready should invest in enhancing their knowledge of threats, improving computer security tools, and boosting the creation of new systems protected by AI. As part of this, joint research that looks at the connection between ethics, cyber safety and AI is recommended.

Making and using systems that look at threats in a smart way is part of active solutions to protect from cyber-attacks. These systems should use AI to look at a lot of data, anticipate new threats and give defenders helpful information. Making threat intelligence solutions better can be done by adding automatic response systems, behavioral modeling and AI-powered detection.

Without a doubt, AI has changed the way cybersecurity and crime work. It has introduced new chances but also problems never heard about before. It is very important to consider the results, solutions and future choices in this growing situation as people handle the difficult connection between dangers made by AI technology and steps taken for protection. As AI attacks get more advanced, there is a need to quickly deliberate about how smart machines are being used in cybersecurity and crimes. Malware, automatic hacking, phishing emails, and AI-driven botnets are major challenges for old cyber protection systems. Arguments between experts on cybersecurity show how important it is to have strong and flexible ways of defending ourselves. These defenses must be able to keep up with attacks that use artificial intelligence because they are very fast and clever.

The review gives a complete view of how experts in cybersecurity and criminals use AI. AI algorithms make automated hacking happen. This uses the weak spots and breaks down setup security systems. There is a need for smart user education because tricky phishing tricks by AI are convincing and made for each person. The smart malware, made smarter by artificial intelligence needs us to keep improving at finding and dealing with threats. AI helps with security measures by using complex analysis, making automated responses and predicting attacks.

An active and adaptable cybersecurity way is needed when handling threats from artificial intelligence-based online attacks. This study shows that we need a big change in how defenses work. It emphasizes how important it is to keep developing defense strategies or means and finding threats early on. To realize how important people are in keeping computer systems safe, there should be platforms that teach users about safety and also use smart machines to find out when there’s a problem. Active and adaptable online safety is needed for working together globally as well as making laws. Sharing information about threats online and making rules for using AI in cybersecurity is needed. This is because cybercriminals are attacking across all platforms on the internet. Working together can help make a strong defense against changing online dangers.

Spending on research and development is important to fight the increase in cyber threats powered by AI. Governments and forward-thinking entities should budget for costs to enhance detection, improve computer safety tech, and help invent new AI defense systems. To keep up with new problems, there is a need for research that looks at the link between cyber safety, ethics, and AI. Active online safety steps must use AI-powered programs that find malicious meta, look at assess behaviors and react accordingly. These tools can make threat analysis much better by flagging novel dangers before they happen and giving defenders helpful details. Using AI-powered authentication methods that focus on the user will make security and precision better. Active ways to stop attacks involve biometric checks, multiple-factor verification, and always checking what users do. There is a need to work together and advocate for laws that make sure AI in cybersecurity is legally applied. By so doing, everyone can access and enjoy the benefits of AI innovations.

Ansari, M. F. (2021).  The relationship between employees’ risk scores and the effectiveness of the AI-based security awareness training program  (Doctoral dissertation, University of the Cumberlands). https://www.proquest.com/openview/7b5dfc87a095925d63eec5dc0d968b48/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

Aziz, L. A. R., & Andriansyah, Y. (2023). The role Artificial Intelligence in modern banking: An exploration of AI-driven approaches for enhanced fraud prevention, risk management, and regulatory compliance.  Reviews of Contemporary Business Analytics ,  6 (1), 110-132. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3394-5222

Hassan, S. K., & Ibrahim, A. (2023). The role of artificial Intelligence in Cyber Security and Incident Response.  International Journal for Electronic Crime Investigation ,  7 (2). https://doi.org/10.54692/ijeci.2023.0702154

Kumar, N. (2023). AI in Cybersecurity: Threat Detection and Response with Machine Learning.  Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology ,  44 (3), 38-46. https://doi.org/10.52783/tjjpt.v44.i3.237

Liang, Y., Samtani, S., Guo, B., & Yu, Z. (2020). Behavioral biometrics for continuous authentication in the internet-of-things era: An artificial intelligence perspective.  IEEE Internet of Things Journal ,  7 (9), 9128-9143. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2020.3004077

Pantserev, K. A. (2020). The malicious use of AI-based deepfake technology as the new threat to psychological security and political stability.  Cyber defence in the age of AI, smart societies and augmented humanity , 37-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35746-7_3

Schmitt, M. (2023). Securing the Digital World: Protecting smart infrastructures and digital industries with Artificial Intelligence (AI)-enabled malware and intrusion detection.  Journal of Industrial Information Integration ,  36 , 100520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2023.100520

Spring, J. M., Galyardt, A., Householder, A. D., & VanHoudnos, N. (2020). On managing vulnerabilities in AI/ML systems. In  New Security Paradigms Workshop 2020  (pp. 111-126). https://doi.org/10.1145/3442167.3442177

Wu, H., Han, H., Wang, X., & Sun, S. (2020). Research on artificial intelligence enhancing internet of things security: A survey.  Ieee Access ,  8 , 153826-153848. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3018170

Xing, Y., Shu, H., Zhao, H., Li, D., & Guo, L. (2021). Survey on botnet detection techniques: Classification, methods, and evaluation.  Mathematical Problems in Engineering ,  2021 , 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6640499

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Related Essays

Medication errors and hazards, epidemiological analysis: chronic health problem, lack of health literacy in patients, marginal world by carson, animal models for the social determinant of health and aging-related diseases, pathophysiology of delayed wound healing, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

• University News
• Faculty & Research
• Health & Medicine
• Science & Technology
• Social Sciences
• Humanities & Arts
• Students & Alumni
• Arts & Culture
• Sports & Athletics
• The Professions
• International
• New England Guide

The Magazine

• Current Issue
• Past Issues

Class Notes & Obituaries

• Browse Class Notes
• Browse Obituaries

Collections

• Commencement
• The Context

Harvard Squared

• Harvard in the Headlines

Support Harvard Magazine

• Why We Need Your Support
• How We Are Funded
• Ways to Support the Magazine
• Special Gifts
• Behind the Scenes

Classifieds

• Vacation Rentals & Travel
• Real Estate
• Products & Services
• Harvard Authors’ Bookshelf
• Education & Enrichment Resource
• Ad Prices & Information
• Place An Ad

Follow Harvard Magazine:

Features | 1.1.2000

Code Is Law

On liberty in cyberspace.

Every age has its potential regulator, its threat to liberty. Our founders feared a newly empowered federal government; the Constitution is written against that fear. John Stuart Mill worried about the regulation by social norms in nineteenth-century England; his book On Liberty is written against that regulation. Many of the progressives in the twentieth century worried about the injustices of the market. The reforms of the market, and the safety nets that surround it, were erected in response.

Ours is the age of cyberspace. It, too, has a regulator. This regulator, too, threatens liberty. But so obsessed are we with the idea that liberty means "freedom from government" that we don't even see the regulation in this new space. We therefore don't see the threat to liberty that this regulation presents.

This regulator is code--the software and hardware that make cyberspace as it is. This code, or architecture, sets the terms on which life in cyberspace is experienced. It determines how easy it is to protect privacy, or how easy it is to censor speech. It determines whether access to information is general or whether information is zoned. It affects who sees what, or what is monitored. In a host of ways that one cannot begin to see unless one begins to understand the nature of this code, the code of cyberspace regulates.

This regulation is changing. The code of cyberspace is changing. And as this code changes, the character of cyberspace will change as well. Cyberspace will change from a place that protects anonymity, free speech, and individual control, to a place that makes anonymity harder, speech less free, and individual control the province of individual experts only.

My aim in this short essay is to give a sense of this regulation, and a sense of how it is changing. For unless we understand how cyberspace can embed, or displace, values from our constitutional tradition, we will lose control over those values. The law in cyberspace--code--will displace them.

THE REGULATIONS OF CODE

The basic code of the Internet implements a set of protocols called TCP/IP. These protocols enable the exchange of data among interconnected networks. This exchange occurs without the networks knowing the content of the data, or without any true idea of who in real life the sender of a given bit of data is. This code is neutral about the data, and ignorant about the user.

These features of TCP/IP have consequences for the "regulability" of behavior on the Internet. They make regulating behavior difficult. To the extent that it is hard to identify who people are, it is harder to trace behavior back to a particular individual. And to the extent it is hard to identify what kind of data is being sent, it is harder to regulate the use of particular kinds of data. These architectural features of the Internet mean that governments are relatively disabled in their ability to regulate behavior on the Net.

In some contexts, for some, this unregulability is a virtue. This feature of the Net, for example, protects free speech. It codes a First Amendment into the architecture of cyberspace, because it makes it relatively hard for governments, or powerful institutions, to control who says what when. Information from Bosnia or East Timor can flow freely to the world because the Net makes it hard for governments in those countries to control how information flows. The Net makes it hard because its architecture makes it hard.

But in other contexts, in the view of others, this unregulability is not a virtue--take the German government confronted by Nazi speech, for example, or the U.S. government faced with child pornography. In these contexts, the architecture disables regulation as well. But in these contexts, unregulability is viewed as a vice.

And not just with Nazi speech and child porn. The most important contexts of regulation in the future will affect Internet commerce: where the architecture does not enable secure transactions; where it makes it very easy to hide the source of interference; where it facilitates the distribution of illegal copies of software and music. In these contexts, commerce at least will not view unregulability as a virtue; unregulability here will interfere with the ability of commerce to flourish.

So what can be done?

There are many who think that nothing can be done: that the unregulability of the Internet is fixed; that there is nothing we can do to change it; that it will, so long as it is the Internet, remain unregulable space. That its "nature" makes it so.

But no thought is more dangerous to the future of liberty in cyberspace than this faith in freedom guaranteed by the code. For the code is not fixed. The architecture of cyberspace is not given. Unregulability is a function of code, but the code can change. Other architectures can be layered onto the basic TCP/IP protocols, and these other architectures can make behavior on the Net fundamentally regulable. Commerce is building these other architectures; the government can help; the two together can transform the character of the Net. They can and they are.

OTHER ARCHITECTURES

What makes the net unregulable is that it is hard to tell who someone is, and hard to know the character of the content being delivered. Both of these features are now changing. Architectures for facilitating identification--or, more generally, for certifying facts about the user (that he is over 18; that he is a he; that he is an American; that he is a lawyer)--are emerging. Architectures for rating content (porn, hate speech, violent speech, political speech) have been described and are being implemented. Each is being developed without the mandate of government, and the two together could facilitate an extraordinary degree of control over behavior on the Net. The two together, that is, could flip the unregulability of the Net.

Could--depending upon how they are designed. Architectures are not binary. There is not simply a choice about implementing an identification architecture, or a rating architecture, or not. What the architecture enables, and how it limits its control, are choices. And depending upon these choices, much more than regulability will be at stake.

Consider identification, or certification, architectures first. We have many certification architectures in real space. The driver's license is a simple example. When the police stop you and demand your license, they are asking for a certain certification that you are licensed to drive. That certification includes your name, your sex, your age, where you live. It must include all that because there is no other simple way to link the license to the person. You must give up all these facts about yourself to certify that in fact you are the proper holder of the license.

But certification in cyberspace could be much more narrowly tailored. If a site required that only adults enter, you could--using certification technologies--certify that you were an adult, without also revealing who you were or where you came from. The technology could make it possible to selectively certify facts about you, while withholding other facts about you. The technology could function under a "least-revealing-means" test in cyberspace even if it can't in real space.

Could--depending upon how it was designed. But there is no necessity that it will develop like this. There are other architectures developing--we could call them "one-card-shows all." In these architectures, there is no simple way to limit what gets revealed by a certificate. If a certificate holds your name, address, age, citizenship, and whether you are a lawyer, and if you need to certify that you are a lawyer, this architecture would certify not only that you are a lawyer--but also all the other facts about you that the certificate holds. Under this architecture, more is better. Nothing enables the individual to steer for less.

The difference between these designs is that one enables privacy in a way that the other does not. One codes privacy into an identification architecture by giving the user a simple choice about how much is revealed; the other is oblivious to that value.

Thus whether the certification architecture that emerges protects privacy depends upon the choices of those who code. Their choices depend upon the incentives they face. If protecting privacy is not an incentive--if the market has not sufficiently demanded it and if law has not, either--then this code will not provide it.

The example about identification is just one among many. Consider another, involving information privacy. RealJukebox is a technology for copying music from a CD to a computer, as well as for downloading music from the Net to store on a computer's hard drive. In October it was revealed that the system was a bit nosy--that it snooped the hard disk of the user and reported back to the company what it found. It did this secretly, of course; RealNetworks didn't tell anyone its product was collecting and reporting personal data. It just did. When this snooping was discovered, the company at first defended the practice (saying no data about individuals were actually stored). But it quickly came to its senses, and promised not to collect such data.

This "problem" is caused, again, by the architecture. You can't easily tell in cyberspace who's snooping what. And while the problem might be corrected by an architecture (a technology called P3P would help), here's a case where law would do well. If these data were deemed the property of the individual, then taking them without express permission would be theft.

In these contexts, and others, architectures will enable values from our tradition--or not. In each, there will be decisions about how best to build out the Internet's architecture consistent with those values, and how to integrate those architectures with law. The choice about code and law will be a choice about values.

MAKING CHOICES ABOUT VALUES

So should we have a role in choosing this code, if this code will choose our values? Should we care about how values emerge here?

In another time, this would have been an odd question. Self-government is all about tracking and modifying influences that affect fundamental values--or, as I described them at the start, regulations that affect liberty. In another time we would have said, "Obviously we should care. Obviously we should have a role."

But we live in an era fundamentally skeptical about self-government. Our age is obsessed with leaving things alone. Let the Internet develop as the coders would develop it, the common view has it. Keep government out.

This is an understandable view, given the character of our government's regulation. Given its flaws, it no doubt seems best simply to keep government away. But this is an indulgence that is dangerous at any time. It is particularly dangerous now.

Our choice is not between "regulation" and "no regulation." The code regulates. It implements values, or not. It enables freedoms, or disables them. It protects privacy, or promotes monitoring. People choose how the code does these things. People write the code. Thus the choice is not whether people will decide how cyberspace regulates. People--coders--will. The only choice is whether we collectively will have a role in their choice--and thus in determining how these values regulate--or whether collectively we will allow the coders to select our values for us.

For here's the obvious point: when government steps aside, it's not as if nothing takes its place. It's not as if private interests have no interests; as if private interests don't have ends that they will then pursue. To push the antigovernment button is not to teleport us to Eden. When the interests of government are gone, other interests take their place. Do we know what those interests are? And are we so certain they are anything better?

Our first response should be hesitation. It is proper to let the market develop first. But as the Constitution checks and limits what Congress does, so too should constitutional values check and limit what a market does. We should test both the laws of Congress and the product of a market against these values. We should interrogate the architecture of cyberspace as we interrogate the code of Congress.

Unless we do, or unless we learn how, the relevance of our constitutional tradition will fade. The importance of our commitment to fundamental values, through a self-consciously enacted constitution, will fade. We will miss the threat that this age presents to the liberties and values that we have inherited. The law of cyberspace will be how cyberspace codes it, but we will have lost our role in setting that law.

Lawrence Lessig is the Berkman professor for entrepreneurial legal studies at Harvard Law School. His most recent book, Code, and Other Laws of Cyberspace (Basic Books), has just been published (see http://code-is-law.org ). The website of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at the law school (see page 50) is http://cyber.law.harvard.edu .

Lawrence Lessig is the Berkman professor for entrepreneurial legal studies at Harvard Law School. His most recent book, Code, and Other Laws of Cyberspace (Basic Books), has just been published (see http://code-is-law.org ). The website of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at the law school is http://cyber.law.harvard.edu .

You might also like

Breaking Bread

Alexander Heffner ’12 plumbs the state of democracy.

Reading the Winds

Thai sailor Sophia Montgomery competes in the Olympics.

Chinese Trade Dragons

How Will China’s Rapid Growth in the Clean Technology Industry Reshape U.S.-China Policy?

Most popular

The Mindfulness Chronicles

Psychologist Ellen Langer's unconventional research. Plus, read about applying mindfulness techniques to eating.

More to explore

American Citizenship Through Photography

How photographs promote social justice

John Harvard's Journal

Harvard Philosophy Professor Alison Simmons on "Being a Minded Thing"

A philosopher on perception, the canon, and being “a minded thing” 

Food Tours and More in Pioneer Valley Massachusetts

A local-food lovers’ paradise

Essay Service Examples Technology Cyber Security

Cyber Security and Its Importance in Cyberspace

Table of contents

Concepts of cyber security, cyberspace and cyberattack, common cyber threats, significance of cyber security, reports of some organizations, conclusions.

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

• Cyberspace : it is a global domain within the information environment consisting of the interdependent network of information technology infrastructures and resident data, including the Internet, telecommunications networks, computer systems, and embedded processors and controllers (Gortney, 2010, p. 58).
• Cyber security : it is basically that providing the security in cyberspace. When doing this, the purpose is to ensure system’s continuity and to guard data from attackers (Gortney, 2010, p. 57). It is the one of the most important things because our data are kept on the cyberspace.
• Cyberattack : it is an attack launched from one or more computers against another computer, multiple computers or networks. Cyberattacks can be broken down into two broad types: attacks where the goal is to disable the target computer or knock it offline, or attacks where the goal is to get access to the target computer's data and perhaps gain admin privileges on it (Fruhlinger, 2020).
• According to the AT&T Cyber Security Report, there was a 458% increase in the times hackers looked for weakness of IoT connections.
• According to the Cisco Security Report, there was a 221% increase in the security violations of the web sites.
• According to the Dell Annual Security Report, the number of malwares nearly doubled to roughly 8 billion.
• According to the Symantec Internet Security Threats Report, spear phishing campaigns aiming employees increased 55% compared to 2015 (Morgan, 2016).
• In a circumstance that the numbers are like this, we cannot say to attach importance to cyber security is sufficient because numerous people are using Internet, but hack activities are increasing day by day, too. Maybe we are not affected from hack activities, but these affect us implicitly. Taking everything into consideration, we have to pay more attention to cyberworld.

Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions.

Cite this paper

Related essay topics.

Get your paper done in as fast as 3 hours, 24/7.

Related articles

Most popular essays

• Cyber Security

Online Banking also known as Internet Banking or e-banking, is an electronic payment system that...

Cybersecurity has been growing rapidly since 2006 when cloud computing was introduced by most...

• College Goals

“You know what’s better than building things up in your imagination? Building things up in real...

• Children and Technology

21 century is known as the technological era. Today, the whole civilized world is aware of the...

• Information Technology

Today with more people dependent on information technology, cybersecurity has become a major issue...

• Personal Strengths

I humbly wish to further my educational career on the field of Cyber Security Engineering with...

Cyber security has its unique role in securing information in every sector. Protecting information...

• Network Security

In human life the computer has bought a lot of changes in the way of doing simple tasks and made...

• Cyber Crimes

I was the first among my friends and neighbors to get a computer around the age of 10. I can...

Join our 150k of happy users

• Get original paper written according to your instructions
• Save time for what matters most

Fair Use Policy

EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].

We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.

Provide your email, and we'll send you this sample!

By providing your email, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Say goodbye to copy-pasting!

Get custom-crafted papers for you.

Enter your email, and we'll promptly send you the full essay. No need to copy piece by piece. It's in your inbox!

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Cyberspace and International Relations: Theory, Prospects and Challenges

Cyberspace is everywhere in todays world and has significant implications not only for global economic activity, but also for international politics and transnational social relations. This compilation addresses for the first time the cyberization of international relations - the growing dependence of actors in IR on the infrastructure and instruments of the internet, and the penetration of cyberspace into all fields of their activities. The volume approaches this topical issue in a comprehensive and interdisciplinary fashion, bringing together scholars from disciplines such as IR, security studies, ICT studies and philosophy as well as experts from everyday cyber-practice. In the first part, concepts and theories are presented to shed light on the relationship between cyberspace and international relations, discussing implications for the discipline and presenting fresh and innovative theoretical approaches. Contributions in the second part focus on specific empirical fields of act...

Related Papers

marco mayer

The course addresses the following three main questions: a) Why are cyberspace issues acquiring increasing importance in international relations? b)What are the main conflicts and power dynamics in this new domain? c) Are there any viable strategies to bridge the existing global governance gap and mitigate the ongoing ‘cyber arm race’? Recent studies by Nazli Choucri and David Clark provide the basic theoretical background for answering these questions.

Oxford Scholarship Online

Madeline Carr

When The Anarchical Society was published in 1977, the world was on the doorstep of seismic technological change. Forty years later, the information age has placed cyber security at the centre of many global political concerns including armed conflict and international law. The ongoing difficulties associated with accurately attributing cyber attacks introduce a new dimension of anarchy in international relations. This essay draws on Bull’s ideas about social interplay to explore the problem of attribution in cyberspace. It finds that the difficulties of identifying (even) state actors undermine some of the processes and institutions upon which Bull based his ideas. However, it also finds that Bull’s work is useful in unpicking exactly why attribution is so problematic for international relations. Ultimately, Bull’s expectation that actors will look for social solutions to maintain order appears to be holding up in the information age much as it did in the industrial age.

Nikola Schmidt

Various academics have tried to develop the best definition of cyberspace, but almost all lack the most important character of cyberspace – its fluidity. It means that rules, principles, usage habits, services provided and then the influence of physical world are continuously changing the shape of cyberspace during the time by our use of it. This article stands on several interlinked theoretical perspectives: a common approach in constructivism introduced by Berger and Luckmann, a structuration theory developed by Anthony Giddens in sociology and an addition from the second wave of constructivism represented by Bruno Latour who added fluid character to a social construction of reality. The application of these theories is made along with empirically observable characteristics especially of technology development and thus constantly changing the way of interaction between human beings and the technology. We have been shocked by particular changes in our lives during the last decade repeatedly and we have been convinced that this is an advancement of civilization whereas the cyberspace has been changing our perception of norms and rules that have been stable for centuries; norms that have provided stability, certainty and trust. These conditions developed social structures as a reflection and vice versa. The article proposes a perspective why the above drafted conceptualization of cyberspace as a fluid entity along with several variety of emerging dilemmas may never develop into a stable regime where states define rules of the game. However, states may be motivated in exercitation of their interests such as smooth intelligence gathering gaining them strategic advantage and they do that apparently. The article concludes with a variety of implications to cyberspace security based on the conceptualization of cyberspace in the light of constructivist and structurationist theory. The proposed implications for international security are to be used as a reflection tool for possible cyberspace regime theorization where concepts such as stability, certainty and trust have be understood differently.

Global Affairs

Thomas Renard , Andre Barrinha

Cyberspace has become a major locus and focus of international relations. Most global powers have now streamlined cyber issues into their foreign policies, adopting cyber strategies, and appointing designated diplomats to pursue these strategic objectives. This article proposes to explore the concept of cyber-diplomacy, by analysing its evolution and linking it to the broader discussions of diplomacy as a fundamental institution of international society, as defined by the English School of International Relations. It argues that cyber-diplomacy is an emerging international practice that is attempting to construct a cyber-international society, bridging the national interests of states with world society dynamics – the predominant realm in which cyberspace has evolved in the last four decades.

Myriam Dunn Cavelty

We have arrived in an age of mega-hacks, in which high-impact and high attention cyberincidents are becoming the new normal. The increase in strategically consequential, targeted cyberincidents is met with intensified efforts to reduce the risk of cyberconflict through norm-building, mainly geared towards creating deterrent effects at the state level. While these new developments have an overall stabilizing effect on cyber-international relations, the narrow focus on destructive cyberattacks and on state-to-state relations is creating unintended security-reducing side-effects

Review of Policy Research

Geoffrey Herrera

Contexto Internacional

Franco Goldoni

This article is based on the premise that the increasing human interaction in cyberspace elevates it to the level of a strategic domain and, as such, raises theoretical and practical challenges for International Relations. It is founded on an epistemological reflection on the fundamental assumptions of the paradigms that permeate International Relations. The main objective is to conceptualise cyberspace as the strategic domain in the 21st century, as well as to develop an analytical framework that will both provide evidence and investigate the resilience of the foundations of current International Relations, these being specifically, the following precepts: i) sovereignty based on territoriality, ii) state monopoly of power, and iii) accountability between international actors. With this in mind, the approach refers to defence documentation and scientific sources in order to reach a definition that will characterise cyberspace, considering its technical, scientific and strategic asp...

Strategic Impact

Anuta Costinel

Tim Stevens

"The so-called cyber-threat commands the attention of multinational corporations, governments and the strategic community, keen as they are to harness the power of digital communications yet anxious to protect their interests. Attacks such as those which disrupted on-line banking in Estonia and defaced government websites in Georgia, as well as the infamous Stuxnet worm that temporarily shut down Iran’s nuclear programme, are vivid examples of what may be possible within this new strategic domain. But are our networked societies really vulnerable, as some have suggested, to a knock-out blow, perpetrated by state-sponsored hackers or terrorists? And what can be done to defend the state from this and from the encroachment of external networks that transcend its borders and breach its laws? This Adelphi tackles the range of issues raised by our dependence on digital networks. It considers how instantaneous, global communications are challenging national and social orders and what shape those challenges may take as the net is cast ever wider. Comparing the transformations of the Information Age with those of previous generations, when new technologies and emerging transnational threats spread panic in political and strategic circles, the authors examine the real implications for states and statehood."

IAIC Transactions on Sustainable Digital Innovation (ITSDI)

Yusril Ihza Maulana

This paper looks at digital strategy and what it can do to promote a peaceful global local area in the age of computers. Cyberspace holds a key position and particular relevance in international affairs. This subject has gained popularity as most international entertainers have developed their global strategy and implemented various tactics to pursue their primary goals online. For instance, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' use of social media to promote the country, its policies, and its ideals are clear evidence of this. Unfortunately, not all online activities are calm. China and the US are at odds over cyber security, and two groupings of countries are vying for control of the field internationally. Because of this conflict of interest between the countries, cyber diplomacy is required to arbitrate and prevent open cyber war. Cyber diplomacy is an international practice that results from efforts to create an international cyber community by connecting the national interests ...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

SSRN Electronic Journal

Nazli Choucri

Ryan C Maness

Modern diplomacy

Sajad Abedi

Brett J Patron

Strategic Trends 2015: Key Developments in Global Affairs

Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik

Muhammad Anns

Andrew N Liaropoulos

Lukman A QUADRI

Gabadage I . K . Jayawickrama

Management Studies ISSN 2328-2185

Series:Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research Proceedings of the International Conference on Business, Economic, Social Science, and Humanities

dewi triwahyuni

Cyberspace and International Relations:Theory, Prospects and Challenges

Igor Acacio , Marcial Suarez

Contemporary Security Studies

Athina Karatzogianni

International Workshop at Dokuz Eylul University (Izmir, Turkey)

Paolo Bargiacchi

2021 13th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CyCon)

Nikola Pijović

International Security

Lucas Kello

Caucasus International Journal

books.google.com

International Journal of Social Inquiry

Dr. Soner ÇELİK

International Studies Quarterly

Mary Manjikian

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• All Articles
• Books & Reviews
• Anthologies
• Audio Content
• Author Directory
• This Day in History
• War in Ukraine
• Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
• Artificial Intelligence
• Climate Change
• Biden Administration
• Geopolitics
• Benjamin Netanyahu
• Vladimir Putin
• Volodymyr Zelensky
• Nationalism
• Authoritarianism
• Propaganda & Disinformation
• West Africa
• North Korea
• Middle East
• United States
• View All Regions

Article Types

• Capsule Reviews
• Review Essays
• Ask the Experts
• Reading Lists
• Newsletters
• Customer Service
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Subscriber Resources
• Group Subscriptions
• Gift a Subscription

How to Compete in Cyberspace

Cyber command’s new approach, by paul m. nakasone and michael sulmeyer.

In early October 2019, personnel from U.S. Cyber Command landed in Podgorica, the capital of Montenegro, at the invitation of the country’s government. Montenegro has faced increased harassment from Russia since joining NATO in 2017, and the Cyber Command team was there to investigate signs that hackers had penetrated the Montenegrin government’s networks.  Working side by side with Montenegrin partners, the team saw an opportunity to improve American cyber defenses ahead of the 2020 election.

After a “hunt forward” mission has been completed, Cyber Command works with other parts of the U.S. government to disclose its findings. The findings enable the U.S. government to defend critical networks more effectively and allow large antivirus companies to update their products to better protect their users. The net effect of the many hunt forward missions that Cyber Command has conducted in recent years has been the mass inoculation of millions of systems, which has reduced the future effectiveness of the exposed malware and our adversaries. 

The hunt forward mission to Montenegro represented a new, more proactive strategy to counter online threats that reflects Cyber Command’s evolution over the last ten years from a reactive, defensive posture to a more effective, proactive posture called “persistent engagement.” When Cyber Command was established in 2010, the operative assumption was that its focus should be on trying to prevent the military’s networks from being infiltrated or disabled. But a reactive and defensive posture proved inadequate to manage evolving threats. Even as the military learned to better protect its networks, adversaries’ attacks became more frequent, sophisticated, and severe. We learned that we cannot afford to wait for cyber attacks to affect our military networks. We learned that defending our military networks requires executing operations outside our military networks. The threat evolved, and we evolved to meet it.

PROACTIVE DEFENSE

In 2008, a cyber attack compromised the Defense Department’s unclassified and classified networks. The incident provided a wake-up call about the need to protect American secrets from foreign hackers and led to the creation of Cyber Command in 2010 to organize that effort. Cyber Command protects U.S. military networks, defends the United States from significant cyber attacks, and directs cyber effects operations abroad. Its force consists of over 6,000 service members, civilians, and contractors who work at its headquarters at Fort Meade in Maryland and at bases in Georgia, Hawaii, and Texas. 

Over the first decade of its existence, Cyber Command learned that merely securing network perimeters does not provide sufficient defense. As a result, we have changed the way Cyber Command defends Department of Defense networks in three ways. First, we have increased our focus on what happens inside our own networks, not just on the walls around them. Our 68 cyber protection teams proactively hunt for adversary malware on our own networks rather than simply waiting for an intrusion to be identified. The cyber protection teams have improved the speed and effectiveness with which we detect, quarantine, and eject intruders from the military’s networks.

Second, we have adopted a different way of thinking about networks: as legendary cryptographer Claude Shannon put it, “assume that the enemy knows the system,” and treat every host, server, and connection as potentially hostile. Although this proactive approach, known as “zero trust” in the cybersecurity community, is not new, we are scaling its adoption across the military’s networks. The goal is simple but strategic. We aim to prevent toeholds from turning into beachheads so that a single compromise will not threaten the military’s ability to accomplish its mission.

Treat every host, server, and connection as potentially hostile.

Third, we are cultivating a mindset of accountability in which military commanders treat the defense of computer networks as an essential requirement, not an afterthought to be dealt with only after something goes wrong. This “command-centric” approach reflects the fact that military commanders cannot assess the readiness of their forces without accounting for the security of the networks on which those forces depend. In 2017, when  tensions on the Korean Peninsula were high, we realized that an important Department of Defense network in the area was vulnerable. Proactive leadership ensured that this mission-critical method for commanding and controlling forces was quickly secured. Lessons from this and other incidents have informed our efforts to treat networks as an area of operations led by a single commander. By aligning authority and accountability for network operations, applications, enterprise services, and cybersecurity, commanders have gained improved insight into threats, as well as the capabilities to defeat them.

DEFENDING FORWARD

These proactive defensive measures on our networks have provided an essential boost to our cybersecurity, but they are insufficient in the evolving threat environment. We have learned that we also have to “defend forward,” outside our networks. Every day, more actors execute more sophisticated attacks against more civilian and military targets. The Chinese government uses cyber capabilities to steal sensitive data, intellectual property, and personal data from the U.S. government and U.S. businesses at great cost to the U.S. economy and national security. In May 2020, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security warned about the People’s Republic of China’s efforts to compromise medical research into COVID-19 vaccines. The PRC supplements those cyberspace operations with influence campaigns to obscure international narratives about their activities. 

Russia uses cyberspace for espionage and theft and to disrupt U.S. infrastructure while attempting to erode confidence in the nation’s democratic processes. Iran undertakes online influence campaigns, espionage efforts, and outright attacks against government and industrial sectors. North Korea flouts sanctions by hacking international financial networks and cryptocurrency exchanges to generate revenue that funds its weapons development activities. Violent extremist organizations have used the Internet to recruit terrorists, raise funds, direct violent attacks, and disseminate gruesome propaganda. 

Russia uses cyberspace for espionage and theft.

In the face of these threats, the U.S. government has changed how it will respond. In 2018, Congress clarified the statutory authority for military cyber operations to enable Cyber Command to conduct traditional military activities in addition to the mostly preparatory operations to which it had been limited previously. That same year, the White House released a National Cyber Strategy, which aligned economic, diplomatic, intelligence, and military efforts in cyberspace.

At the Department of Defense, a new National Defense Strategy in 2018 focused the military on the need to expand the competitive space between the United States and its adversaries. Part of that expansion needed to occur in cyberspace. To that end, Cyber Command was elevated to the status of a unified combatant command, which gave cyber issues a more powerful voice within the Department of Defense. Increased authorities and funding soon followed. DoD also released a new cyber strategy , which for the first time enshrined the concept of defend forward. This updated approach acknowledged that defending the United States in cyberspace requires executing operations outside the U.S. military’s networks and that the country cannot afford to wait for attacks to come its way.

Cyber Command implements this defend forward strategy through the doctrine of persistent engagement. The idea behind persistent engagement is that so much of the corrosive effects of cyber attacks against the United States occur below the threshold of traditional armed conflict. Yet much of Cyber Command’s combat power had been devoted toward preparations in the event of future contingencies. We realized that Cyber Command needs to do more than prepare for a crisis in the future; it must compete with adversaries today. 

The country cannot afford to wait for attacks to come its way.

This doctrine of persistent engagement reflects the fact that one-off cyber operations are unlikely to defeat adversaries. Instead, U.S. forces must compete with adversaries on a recurring basis, making it far more difficult for them to advance their goals over time. For example, publicly releasing adversary malware obtained during hunt forward missions to the cybersecurity community makes that malware less effective because defenses can be tuned to detect and defeat it. Additionally, cyber effects operations allow Cyber Command to disrupt and degrade the capabilities our adversaries use to conduct attacks. 

The persistent engagement doctrine also emphasizes the need for Cyber Command to enable its partners , including by providing indications and warnings to other parts of the government. To that end, we have invested in platforms that facilitate faster sharing of indications and warnings across federal, state, and local governments. One example of this is a new “9-line” incident reporting standard that offers streamlined reporting and response for National Guard units across the country. My goal has been to institutionalize and expedite this kind of enabling assistance. 

Cyber Command needs to do more than prepare for a crisis in the future; it must compete with adversaries today.

Some have speculated that competing with adversaries in cyberspace will increase the risk of escalation—from hacking to all-out war. The thinking goes that by competing more proactively in cyberspace, the risk of miscalculation, error, or accident increases and could escalate to a crisis. Cyber Command takes these concerns seriously, and reducing this risk is a critical part of the planning process. We are confident that this more proactive approach enables Cyber Command to conduct operations that impose costs while responsibly managing escalation. In addition, inaction poses its own risks: that Chinese espionage , Russian intimidation, Iranian coercion, North Korean burglary, and terrorist propaganda will continue unabated. So the question is how, not whether, to act. Just like the rest of the U.S. military, cyber forces abide by widely accepted principles of international law, and when they take direct action, they narrowly tailor the effect.

FROM DOCTRINE TO RESULTS

The National Security Agency is a critical Cyber Command partner. The two organizations are not one and the same: although one of us (General Nakasone) leads both, and although both are headquartered at Fort Meade, they are charged with different missions. The NSA produces signals intelligence and, through its cybersecurity mission, protects National Security Systems.  Cyber Command defends military networks and directs cyberspace operations against adversaries. Yet because of the overlapping nature of the threats they face, the common domain in which they work, and their shared focus on defending the nation, the two organizations work closely together.

The power of this partnership can be seen in how Cyber Command and the NSA worked together to protect against meddling in the 2018 midterm elections . Experts from both organizations formed the Russia Small Group (RSG), a task force created to ensure that democratic processes were executed unfettered by Russian activity. It shared indicators of potential compromise, enabling DHS to harden the security of election infrastructure. It also shared threat indicators with the FBI to bolster that organization’s efforts to counter foreign trolls on social media platforms. And Cyber Command sent personnel on several hunt forward missions, where governments had invited them to search for malware on their networks. Thanks to these and other efforts, the United States disrupted a concerted effort to undermine the midterm elections. Together with its partners, Cyber Command is doing all of this and more for the 2020 elections. 

Cyber Command’s partnership with the NSA also has been central to the online fight against the Islamic State, or ISIS. As part of a previous assignment as head of the army component of Cyber Command, one of us (General Nakasone) led the task force charged with fighting ISIS in cyberspace. The terrorist group’s propagandists used to spread their message on Twitter, YouTube, and their own websites. Today, because of our efforts, they have a much harder time doing so. At the height of its influence, ISIS published magazines in multiple languages, but it now struggles to publish in anything other than Arabic. At the same time as the U.S.-led coalition of conventional forces has prevailed over the physical caliphate, Cyber Command’s efforts have helped defeat the virtual one.

For all their power and results, cyberspace operations are not silver bullets.

For all their power and results, however, cyberspace operations are not silver bullets, and to be most effective, they require much planning and preparation. Cyber Command thus works closely with other combatant commands to integrate the planning of kinetic and nonkinetic effects. Cyber Command’s capabilities are meant to complement, not replace, other military capabilities, as well as the tools of diplomacy, sanctions, and law enforcement. And they are often used in cooperation with foreign military partners, who bring different skills and techniques to the table. The West’s united front against the Soviet Union kept the Cold War cold; likewise, today, the United States and its allies are building unity of purpose to promote respect for widely held international norms in cyberspace.

AHEAD OF THE CURVE

Militaries succeed when they embrace new technologies aimed at planning for the next war, not fighting the last one. Cyber Command is committed to working with the private sector to harness emerging technologies. Given that some of the most innovative thinking today is happening in the offices of American tech companies, we would be shortsighted if we were not pursuing partnerships with them. Such partnerships should of course be voluntary—companies can decide on their own if and when it makes sense to work with Cyber Command—but partnering with technology companies has been one of Cyber Command’s top priorities.

Many leading U.S. companies find themselves on the frontlines of competition in cyberspace. Working collaboratively where we can allows us to improve collective defense and stay a step ahead of our adversaries. This is all the more important as technology continues to advance. It is not hard to imagine an AI-powered worm that could disrupt not just personal computers but mobile devices, industrial machinery, and more. Like AI, fifth-generation (5G) wireless networks offer promise and peril with exceptionally fast speeds that underpin ubiquitous connectivity. Such networks can enable authoritarian states to monitor and control their citizens. That is why the United States continues to stress the importance of supply-chain integrity and the dangers of relying on technology from authoritarian countries.  

One of the first hurdles to overcome in our effort to increase cooperation with private-sector companies was finding a place to meet their workers. Because so much of what Cyber Command does is sensitive, it proved challenging to host an unclassified meeting at an unclassified location with people who were not affiliated with the U.S. government. Therefore, we created DreamPort, a facility not far from our headquarters at Fort Meade. DreamPort is not just a building; it is a signal that Cyber Command is receptive to outside thinking. In 2019, for example, it served as an incubator for an effort to bring the aforementioned zero trust approach to network security to the Defense Department, allowing private companies with more experience with this concept to offer advice about what would and would not work for the military. DreamPort also hosts promising high school and college interns from nearby schools, who bring fresh ideas and in return, receive mentoring and a chance to return full-time when they finish their studies. 

Many leading U.S. companies find themselves on the frontlines of competition in cyberspace.

Readers may ask: how can Cyber Command compete with private-sector salaries? The answer is that what appeals to so many of our recruits is the opportunity to serve their country in a relatively novel domain of conflict and the chance to avail themselves of world-class training and high-stakes assignments. Where things get complicated, however, is that for those in uniform, professional advancement usually involves rotating to new jobs and assignments every few years. Some view this as a perk, but for many who are forgoing salaries at tech companies, such constant interruption can be frustrating—even a deal breaker.  This is why we value relationships with organizations like the National Security Innovation Network, which provides access to a diverse talent pipeline, from college interns to advanced degree professionals.

The good news is that each of the military’s service branches has made great strides in transforming cyberspace operations into more of a profession and less of a trade. A decade ago, military personnel rotated out of cyber positions frequently, whereas now, the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines have encouraged professionalization by offering personnel in this area repeat assignments, specialized training, and incentive pay. But to retain the best of the best, more experimentation and flexibility is needed. When a service member does leave for the private sector , we should take that as affirmation that we are developing people with the right mix of skills. At the same time, we should do all we can to encourage those who leave and make it easier for them to rejoin the national security community down the road.

GOING FORWARD

Ten years ago, Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn wrote a prescient article in Foreign Affairs about the military’s growing role in cyberspace. Many of his observations have stood the test of time. Cyberspace remains a domain where adversaries attempt, as he wrote, “to overcome overwhelming U.S. advantages in conventional military power,” attackers still benefit from “low barriers to technological innovation,” and Cyber Command still must “work with a variety of partners inside and outside the U.S. government.”

But much has changed in the past ten years. Our adversaries have abused open platforms for sharing knowledge and views by creating troll farms for disinformation. Terrorists have used the Internet to control forces and recruit new members. Portions of critical infrastructure, such as the power supply in Ukraine, have been disabled. Advances in artificial intelligence , autonomous vehicles, and 5G networks will only complicate this landscape of threats.

In large part to account for these and other changes, Congress established the Cyberspace Solarium Commission in 2019 to prepare for the next ten years and consider new approaches to keeping the United States safe in cyberspace.  Readers of the commission’s extensive report will see thoughtful and deliberate proposals to improve the nation’s approach to cybersecurity and its resilience in the face of the threats we just described. 

A point of consensus among these and other proposals is that to compete, U.S. cyber forces should continue to be more proactive and implement the strategy to contest our adversaries’ malicious activity online. But our actions must also remain consistent with the law of armed conflict and other important international norms. In this way, we are protecting U.S. interests from cyber threats and staying true to the nation’s core values. As threats continue to evolve online, U.S. Cyber Command will remain ready to defend the United States in the years ahead.

You are reading a free article.

Subscribe to foreign affairs to get unlimited access..

• Paywall-free reading of new articles and over a century of archives
• Unlock access to iOS/Android apps to save editions for offline reading
• Six issues a year in print and online, plus audio articles
• PAUL M. NAKASONE is Commander of U.S. Cyber Command, Director of the National Security Agency, and Chief of the Central Security Service.
• MICHAEL SULMEYER is Senior Adviser to the Commander of U.S. Cyber Command.
• More By Paul M. Nakasone
• More By Michael Sulmeyer

Most-Read Articles

How france fell to the far right.

In the End, Le Pen Hardly Had to Moderate to Gain Power

Cécile Alduy

What nato means to the world.

After 75 Years, the Alliance Remains Indispensable

Jens Stoltenberg

Can starmer save britain.

Why Labour’s Sweeping Victory May Not Reverse the Country’s Decline

Fintan O’Toole

The best way to end israel’s war in gaza.

Reviving the Arab Peace Initiative Would Resolve the Conflict—and Build a New Palestinian Reality

Mohammad Shtayyeh

Recommended articles, making cyberspace safe for democracy.

The New Landscape of Information Competition

Laura Rosenberger

Defending a new domain.

The Pentagon’s Cyberstrategy

William J. Lynn III

As an LGBTIQ inclusive employer, we celebrate the Luxembourg Pride Week.

• EIB at a glance
• Tackling global challenges together
• Part of the EU family
• Our priorities
• Our results
• EIB Group impact: Boosting GDP and jobs
• Governance and structure
• Shareholders
• Statutory bodies
• Control and evaluation
• Organisation structure
• Corporate responsibility
• Providing finance
• Human rights and the EIB
• Reporting on sustainability
• Our internal commitment
• Managing our environment
• Transparency, accountability and access to information
• Transparency and access to information
• EIB Group Complaints Mechanism overview
• Project procurement complaints
• Investigating fraud and misconduct
• Public consultations
• EIB Institute
• What we offer
• Loans for the public sector
• Framework loans for the public sector
• Loans for the private sector
• Intermediated loans for SMEs, mid-caps and other priorities
• Microfinance
• Venture debt
• Investments in infrastructure and environmental funds
• Investments in SME and mid-cap funds
• Credit enhancement for project finance
• Guarantees in support of SMEs, mid-caps and other objectives
• Advisory services
• Strategic Development
• Market Development
• Project Development
• Mandates and partnerships
• EU Blending facilities
• Donor partnerships
• Shared management funds and financial instruments
• EFSD Guarantee
• All mandates and partnerships
• Global investment map
• Our projects
• All projects
• Projects to be financed
• Financed projects
• Our regions of activity
• European Union
• Enlargement countries
• Western Balkans
• Eastern Neighbourhood
• Southern Neighbourhood
• Sub-Saharan Africa
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• Asia and the Pacific
• EFTA countries
• Climate and environmental sustainability
• Innovation, digital and human capital
• Sustainable energy and natural resources
• Sustainable cities and regions
• Small and medium-sized enterprises
• Social sustainability
• Solidarity with Ukraine
• Project cycle
• Media centre
• All releases
• Press contacts
• Stories and essays
• All Cartoons
• Video library
• Public register
• EIB surveys
• EIB climate survey
• Picture library
• Infographics
• Publications and research
• Publications
• Our research
• Economic analysis
• Surveys and data
• Assessing EIB impact
• Stories - Economics
• Economic conferences and research networks
• EIB open data
• Open learning
• Work with us
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Our recruitment process
• Investor Relations
• Our funding
• Climate Awareness Bonds
• Sustainability Awareness Bonds
• Recent issues
• Outstanding issues
• Investor relations news
• Investor relations publications
• Investor relations newsletters
• Civil society and stakeholder engagement
• Procurement
• Easy-to-read
• The EIB at a glance
• The EIB and development
• The EIB and climate action
• The EIB and SMEs
• The EIB and Ukraine
• The EIB COVID-19 response
• Find a publication

Life in Cyberspace

Publication information

Dr mary aiken.

ISBN: 978-92-861-4295-6 (PDF/EN)

DOI: 10.2867/890925

Related tags

• Cybersecurity
• Research, innovation and technology

Part of the series :

• Read online
• English (EN)
• français (FR)
• Deutsch (DE)

Where would you like to collect your ebook ?

Description

Internet is a real place. Every time we switch on our computers, use a program or an application, or log in to a social media site, we enter a virtual space made up of worlds, domains, forums and rooms. But we behave differently when we interact with technology: technology amplifies and accelerates our deeds; it can help us find useful information, benefit from a wide range of services and stay in touch with our friends, but it can also create addictive-type behaviours and subliminally manipulate us online.

Mary Aiken, a cyberpsychologist specialised in the impact of technology on human behaviour, warns us about cybersecurity: “We need a human-centred approach that is mindful of how humans actually use connected things and not how the tech sector presumes or expects them to”.

This is the fifth essay in the Big Ideas series created by the European Investment Bank.

The EIB has invited international thought leaders to write about the most important issues of the day. These essays are a reminder that we need new thinking to protect the environment, promote equality and improve people’s lives around the globe.

All publications in this series

• A shelter from the pandemic
• On Inequality
• Togetherness - A new heritage deal for Europe
• Hope and strength in the Western Balkans
• The eastern horizon – A regional perspective
• The genome e-volution
• The vision and the path
• Common Ground
• Food for change
• I have a dream
• The virtuous circle
• A bright future
• Smart Europe
• Health is wealth
• Don't fear AI

About the author

Mary is an Adjunct Associate Professor at the Geary Institute for Public Policy University College Dublin, Ireland. She is an Academic Advisor (Psychology) to Europol's European Cyber Crime Centre (EC3), and a member of the EC3 Academic Advisory Network. Mary is a Global Fellow at the Wilson Center, the leading US institution for in-depth research and dialogue to inform actionable ideas on global issues. She is a lecturer in Criminology and Fellow at the School of Law, Middlesex University and Fellow of the Society for Chartered IT Professionals.

 In 2017 Mary was inducted into the Infosecurity Europe Hall of Fame, in recognition of contribution to the information and cybersecurity sector, she is a strategic advisor at European and International levels in policy debates on the impact of technology on human behaviour, and has published and spoken worldwide on this topic. Her research interests include forensic cyberpsychology, AI, human factors in cyber-security, Internet psychology, organized cybercrime, cyber criminology, behavioural manipulation online and the rights of the child in cyber contexts. Mary is a member of the advisory board of The Hague Justice Portal - a foundation for international peace, justice & security. She is a Strategic Advisor to the European Paladin Capital Group Cyber fund.

Mary’s ground-breaking work inspired the CBS prime time television series CSI:Cyber.  Her recent book 'The Cyber Effect' was selected by the Times as a 2016 ‘book of the year’ in the Thought Category, and 2016 ‘best science pick’ by Nature the international journal of science and technology.

Other publications you may like...

Guide to procurement for projects financed by the EIB

European Investment Bank Group Corporate Governance Report for 2023

Report on the implementation of the EIB Group Transparency Policy in 2023

Our website uses anonymised cookies to give you the best browser experience and to collect aggregated statistics. This does not include online advertising cookies.

Cookies on our Careers Section

Our website uses anonymised cookies to give you the best browser experience and to collect aggregated statistics. If you agree, this website section will also include third-party cookies used in online advertising.

To celebrate the International Day of Persons with Disabilities on 3 December, the EIB organises a full week of events to promote exchanges on disability inclusion with staff and expert guests. Diversity is the essence of humanity and a core value of the European Union. As the EU bank, we are committed to promote diversity and inclusion in everything we do.

• CCO Case Studies
• CSWMD Case Studies
• ICAF Case Studies
• NWC Case Studies
• Faculty Seminars
• PRISM Issues
• China Strategic Perspectives
• CSWMD Occasional Papers
• CTNSP Defense and Technology Papers
• CTNSP Working and Occasional Papers
• INSS Strategic Perspectives
• Middle East Strategic Perspectives
• Defense Horizons
• Strategic Forums
• Strategic Monographs
• Asia and the Pacific
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• Middle East and North Africa
• Sub-Saharan Africa
• Acquisition
• Biological & Chemical Defense
• Countering WMD
• Cybersecurity
• Defense Budgets
• Defense Policy
• Ethics & Leadership
• Homeland Security
• Humanitarian Assistance & Disaster Relief
• Insurgency/Irregular Warfare
• International Law & National Security Law
• Terrorism & Extremism
• Joint Strategic Logistics
• Military History
• Military Psychology & Resilience
• Military Strategy
• Missile Defense
• National Security Reform
• Nuclear Policy
• Organizational Change
• Stabilization & Reconstruction
• Supply Chain Management
• Technology & Innovation
• WMD Elimination
• WMD Preparedness/Response

Publications

Integrated deterrence and cyberspace.

By Joseph L. Billingsley (Ed.) Strategic Monographs

Download PDF

This edited volume represents an important contribution to our thinking on cyberspace and national security. It also serves as one example of an enduring and fruitful relationship between the U.S. Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM) and the College of Information and Cyberspace (CIC) at the National Defense University (NDU).

Essays were solicited in mid-2022 from across the USCYBERCOM Academic Engagement Network, a newly minted body developed in consultation with CIC. The top three submissions were selected by an esteemed committee that included Emily Goldman and Michael Warner. After approval by the USCYBERCOM J5, Rear Admiral Heidi Berg, USN, the authors of the selected essays were invited as panelists at the Cyber Symposium on Integrated Deterrence, an event co-hosted by USCYBERCOM and CIC at NDU, located at Fort Lesley J. McNair in Washington, DC, on November 17, 2022.

The photograph on the cover of this volume captures General Paul M. Nakasone, USA, commander of USCYBERCOM, providing the opening remarks for the November event. In those remarks, General Nakasone referred to CIC as “our college” in recognition of the close collaboration between the functional combatant command he currently leads and the hosting war college–level institution aligned to its mission area.

In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, Congress renamed the NDU Information Resources Management College as CIC to prioritize the strategically oriented educational needs of the growing Defense Cyber Workforce. Less than a year after the renaming ceremony, the team at CIC hosted the 2018 Cyberspace Strategy Symposium. The central question of that 2018 event was “What are the foundational organizing principles we need to operate more effectively in cyberspace?” One such principle that event helped to develop was that of persistent engagement, which has since gained wide popularity. That event was the first in a series of USCYBERCOM strategy symposia supported by CIC, the most recent of which was the November 2022 event that this volume is primarily associated with.

The concepts shared herein may help with a better understanding of the current state of cyberspace and national security and how we may shape their future(s). For the reader who may be a strategist, researcher, or practitioner focused on this ever-evolving intersection of competing priorities, I trust you will glean many important strategic insights.

—Joseph L. Billingsley, Editor

Read More  →

• DOI: 10.34190/eccws.23.1.2500
• Corpus ID: 270831856

The Offense-Defense Balance in Cyberspace

• Wade Huntley , Timothy Shives
• Published in European Conference on Cyber… 27 June 2024
• Political Science, Computer Science
• European Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security

27 References

Cyber power.

• Highly Influential

Making Strategic Sense of Cyber Power: Why The Sky is Not Falling

The meaning of the cyber revolution: perils to theory and statecraft, cyberdeterrence and cyberwar, offense, defense, and the causes of war, cooperation under the security dilemma, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

To guard against cyberattacks in space, researchers ask ‘what if?’

Professor of Philosophy, California Polytechnic State University

Disclosure statement

Patrick Lin receives funding from the US National Science Foundation. As related to space affairs, he is a principal member of the US National Space Council's Users' Advisory Group and is also affiliated with American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), For All Moonkind's Institute on Space Law and Ethics, and the Aurelia Institute.

View all partners

If space systems such as GPS were hacked and knocked offline , much of the world would instantly be returned to the communications and navigation technologies of the 1950s. Yet space cybersecurity is largely invisible to the public at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions.

Cyberattacks on satellites have occurred since the 1980s , but the global wake-up alarm went off only a couple of years ago. An hour before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, its government operatives hacked Viasat’s satellite-internet services to cut off communications and create confusion in Ukraine.

I study ethics and emerging technologies and serve as an adviser to the U.S. National Space Council. My colleagues and I at California Polytechnic State University’s Ethics + Emerging Sciences Group released a U.S. National Science Foundation-funded report on June 17, 2024, to explain the problem of cyberattacks in space and help anticipate novel and surprising scenarios .

Space and you

Most people are unaware of the crucial role that space systems play in their daily lives, never mind military conflicts. For instance, GPS uses signals from satellites . GPS-enabled precision timing is essential in financial services where every detail – such as time of payment or withdrawal – needs to be faithfully captured and coordinated. Even making a mobile phone call relies on precise coordination of time in the network.

Besides navigation for airplanes, boats, cars and people, GPS is also important for coordinating fleets of trucks that transport goods to stock local stores every day.

Earth-observation satellites are “eyes in the skies” with a unique vantage point to help forecast the weather, monitor environmental changes, track and respond to natural disasters, boost agricultural crop yields, manage land and water use, monitor troop movements and much more. The loss of these and other space services could be fatal to people vulnerable to natural disasters and crop failure. They could also put global economics and security at serious risk.

Factors in play

In our report, we identified several factors that contribute to the increasing threat of space cyberattacks. For instance, it’s important to recognize that the world is at the start of a new space race .

By all accounts, space is becoming more congested and more contested. Both nation-states and private companies, which are underregulated and now own most of the satellites in orbit, are gearing up to compete for resources and research sites .

Because space is so remote and hard to access, if someone wanted to attack a space system, they would likely need to do it through a cyberattack. Space systems are particularly attractive targets because their hardware cannot be easily upgraded once launched, and this insecurity worsens over time . As complex systems, they can have long supply chains , and more links in the chain increase the chance of vulnerabilities. Major space projects are also challenged to keep up with best practices over the decade or more needed to build them.

And the stakes are unusually high in space. Orbital trash zips around at speeds of 6 to 9 miles per second and can easily destroy a spacecraft on impact. It can also end space programs worldwide given the hypothesized Kessler syndrome in which the Earth is eventually imprisoned in a cocoon of debris. These consequences weigh in favor of space cyberattacks over physical attacks because the debris problem is also likely to affect the attacker.

Moreover, given critical space infrastructure and services, such as GPS, conflicts in space can spark or add more fuel to a conflict on Earth, even those in cyberspace. For instance, Russia warned in 2022 that hacking one of its satellites would be taken as a declaration of war , which was a dramatic escalation from previous norms around warfare .

Conjuring scenarios

Even security professionals who recognize the severity of this space cybersecurity threat face a major challenge. At least in nonclassified forums, only a couple of under-specified scenarios are typically considered: something vague about satellite hacking and something vague about signals jamming or spoofing .

But failure to imagine a full range of possibilities can be devastating for security planning, especially against hackers who are a diverse set of entities with diverse motivations and targets. These variables are vital to nail down because they reveal clues about which strategies and levers defenders may find most effective in a response. For instance, an attack by a state-sponsored hacker may require a different approach than, say, one by a criminal hacker after money or by a chaos agent .

To help with this piece of the security puzzle, our report offers a taxonomy – the ICARUS matrix – that captures these variables and can create more than 4 million unique combinations of variables, which we call scenario prompts. ICARUS is an acronym for “imagining cyberattacks to anticipate risks unique to space.”

Here are three of the 42 scenarios we included in the report.

A 3D or additive printer can be an invaluable resource for quickly creating parts on demand on space missions. A hacker could gain access to a printer on a space station and reprogram it to make tiny imperfections inside the parts it prints. Some of these built-to-fail components could be parts of critical systems.

A hacker could corrupt the data from a planetary probe to show inaccurate atmospheric, temperature or water readings. Corrupted data from a Mars rover, for example, could falsely show that an area has significant subsurface water ice. Any subsequent mission launched to explore the site further would be wasted.

In 1938, a radio drama about an alien attack instigated a panic when many listeners didn’t realize it was fictional. Similarly, a hacker could access the listening feeds of the Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence, or METI , project and insert something resembling alien language in METI’s transcription. They could then leak it to the media, potentially creating panic worldwide and moving financial markets.

Other scenarios in our report involve such things as insider threats, AI vulnerabilities, false flag attacks, ecoterrorism, ransomware during a launch, as well as more distant scenarios about asteroid mining, off-world colonies and space pirates.

Stories for better security

People are hardwired to respond to stories , whether shared around prehistoric campfires or across digital platforms today. Thus, crafting novel and surprising scenarios can help bring to life the invisible threat of space cyberattacks, as well as spotlight nuances across different scenarios that may require interdisciplinary experts to tackle together.

• Cybersecurity
• Space debris
• Space missions
• Space stations

Sydney Horizon Educators – Faculty of Engineering (Targeted)

Dean, Faculty of Education

Lecturer in Indigenous Health (Identified)

Social Media Producer

PhD Scholarship

share this!

July 4, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

written by researcher(s)

To guard against cyberattacks in space, researchers ask 'what if?'

by Patrick Lin, The Conversation

If space systems such as GPS were hacked and knocked offline , much of the world would instantly be returned to the communications and navigation technologies of the 1950s. Yet space cybersecurity is largely invisible to the public at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions.

Cyberattacks on satellites have occurred since the 1980s , but the global wake-up alarm went off only a couple of years ago. An hour before Russia's invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, its government operatives hacked Viasat's satellite-internet services to cut off communications and create confusion in Ukraine.

I study ethics and emerging technologies and serve as an adviser to the U.S. National Space Council. My colleagues and I at California Polytechnic State University's Ethics + Emerging Sciences Group released a U.S. National Science Foundation-funded report on June 17, 2024, to explain the problem of cyberattacks in space and help anticipate novel and surprising scenarios .

Space and you

Most people are unaware of the crucial role that space systems play in their daily lives, never mind military conflicts. For instance, GPS uses signals from satellites . GPS-enabled precision timing is essential in financial services where every detail—such as time of payment or withdrawal—needs to be faithfully captured and coordinated. Even making a mobile phone call relies on precise coordination of time in the network.

Besides navigation for airplanes, boats, cars and people, GPS is also important for coordinating fleets of trucks that transport goods to stock local stores every day.

Earth-observation satellites are "eyes in the skies" with a unique vantage point to help forecast the weather, monitor environmental changes , track and respond to natural disasters , boost agricultural crop yields, manage land and water use, monitor troop movements and much more. The loss of these and other space services could be fatal to people vulnerable to natural disasters and crop failure . They could also put global economics and security at serious risk.

Factors in play

In our report, we identified several factors that contribute to the increasing threat of space cyberattacks. For instance, it's important to recognize that the world is at the start of a new space race.

By all accounts, space is becoming more congested and more contested. Both nation-states and private companies, which are underregulated and now own most of the satellites in orbit, are gearing up to compete for resources and research sites .

Because space is so remote and hard to access, if someone wanted to attack a space system, they would likely need to do it through a cyberattack. Space systems are particularly attractive targets because their hardware cannot be easily upgraded once launched, and this insecurity worsens over time . As complex systems, they can have long supply chains , and more links in the chain increase the chance of vulnerabilities. Major space projects are also challenged to keep up with best practices over the decade or more needed to build them.

And the stakes are unusually high in space. Orbital trash zips around at speeds of 6 to 9 miles per second and can easily destroy a spacecraft on impact. It can also end space programs worldwide given the hypothesized Kessler syndrome in which the Earth is eventually imprisoned in a cocoon of debris. These consequences weigh in favor of space cyberattacks over physical attacks because the debris problem is also likely to affect the attacker.

Moreover, given critical space infrastructure and services, such as GPS, conflicts in space can spark or add more fuel to a conflict on Earth, even those in cyberspace. For instance, Russia warned in 2022 that hacking one of its satellites would be taken as a declaration of war , which was a dramatic escalation from previous norms around warfare .

Conjuring scenarios

Even security professionals who recognize the severity of this space cybersecurity threat face a major challenge. At least in nonclassified forums, only a couple of under-specified scenarios are typically considered: something vague about satellite hacking and something vague about signals jamming or spoofing .

But failure to imagine a full range of possibilities can be devastating for security planning, especially against hackers who are a diverse set of entities with diverse motivations and targets. These variables are vital to nail down because they reveal clues about which strategies and levers defenders may find most effective in a response. For instance, an attack by a state-sponsored hacker may require a different approach than, say, one by a criminal hacker after money or by a chaos agent .

To help with this piece of the security puzzle, our report offers a taxonomy— the ICARUS matrix —that captures these variables and can create more than 4 million unique combinations of variables, which we call scenario prompts. ICARUS is an acronym for "imagining cyberattacks to anticipate risks unique to space."

Here are three of the 42 scenarios we included in the report.

A 3D or additive printer can be an invaluable resource for quickly creating parts on demand on space missions. A hacker could gain access to a printer on a space station and reprogram it to make tiny imperfections inside the parts it prints. Some of these built-to-fail components could be parts of critical systems.

A hacker could corrupt the data from a planetary probe to show inaccurate atmospheric, temperature or water readings. Corrupted data from a Mars rover, for example, could falsely show that an area has significant subsurface water ice. Any subsequent mission launched to explore the site further would be wasted.

In 1938, a radio drama about an alien attack instigated a panic when many listeners didn't realize it was fictional. Similarly, a hacker could access the listening feeds of the Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence, or METI , project and insert something resembling alien language in METI's transcription. They could then leak it to the media, potentially creating panic worldwide and moving financial markets.

Other scenarios in our report involve such things as insider threats, AI vulnerabilities, false flag attacks, ecoterrorism, ransomware during a launch, as well as more distant scenarios about asteroid mining, off-world colonies and space pirates.

Stories for better security

People are hardwired to respond to stories , whether shared around prehistoric campfires or across digital platforms today. Thus, crafting novel and surprising scenarios can help bring to life the invisible threat of space cyberattacks, as well as spotlight nuances across different scenarios that may require interdisciplinary experts to tackle together.

Provided by The Conversation

Explore further

Feedback to editors

High-selectivity graphene membranes enhance CO₂ capture efficiency

8 hours ago

Exploring the possibility of probing fundamental spacetime symmetries via gravitational wave memory

11 hours ago

Starlings' migratory behavior found to be inherited, not learned

Jul 5, 2024

Webb captures a staggering quasar-galaxy merger in the remote universe

Repurposed technology used to probe new regions of Mars' atmosphere

Evidence shows ancient Saudi Arabia had complex and thriving communities, not struggling people in a barren land

Research finds humpbacks were happier during pandemic pause

Webb admires bejeweled ring of the lensed quasar RX J1131-1231

Researchers demonstrate economical process for the synthesis and purification of ionic liquids

New probe reveals water-ice microstructures

Relevant physicsforums posts, solar activity and space weather update thread.

Jul 4, 2024

Interstellar navigation to Proxima B with an unmanned probe

Early universe massive black holes question.

Jul 2, 2024

Questions about dark matter/energy

Jun 30, 2024

Galaxies as systems extended from the solar system

Jun 28, 2024

Some photos of Antares and Sigma Sagittarii (Nunki)

Jun 23, 2024

More from Astronomy and Astrophysics

Related Stories

US military project to prevent hackers targeting satellites, recognizes rising threat of cyberattacks in space

Jun 27, 2024

European Commission to present space defence plan in March

Jan 24, 2023

Cybersecurity for satellites is a growing challenge as threats to space-based infrastructure grow

Feb 21, 2024

Russia launches supply rocket to ISS

Feb 15, 2024

New report updates NASA on space-based solar power

Jan 11, 2024

EU inaugurates first mainland satellite launch port

Jan 13, 2023

Recommended for you

A desert moss that has the potential to grow on Mars

Jul 1, 2024

NASA astronauts will stay at the space station longer for more troubleshooting of Boeing capsule

Jun 29, 2024

A harmless asteroid will whiz past Earth Saturday. Here's how to spot it

Wind tunnel study shows hypersonic jet engine flow can be controlled optically

NASA picks SpaceX to carry ISS to its watery graveyard after 2030

China lunar probe returns to Earth with samples

Jun 25, 2024

Let us know if there is a problem with our content

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter