Visible to the public “Silent Battle” Goes Loud: Entering a New Era of State-Avowed Cyber Conflict

Title“Silent Battle” Goes Loud: Entering a New Era of State-Avowed Cyber Conflict
Publication TypeConference Paper
Year of Publication2019
AuthorsGiles, Keir, Hartmann, Kim
Conference Name2019 11th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CyCon)
Date PublishedMay 2019
PublisherIEEE
ISBN Number978-9949-9904-5-0
Keywordsattribution, cyber aggressor, cyber conflict, cyber policy, deterrence, EU nations, Human Behavior, NATO, Netherlands intelligence services, politics, pubcrawl, public preparedness, resilience, Resiliency, Russian GRU officers, Salisbury poison attack, Scalability, security of data, state-avowed cyber conflict, state-sponsored cyber attacks, transparency
Abstract

The unprecedented transparency shown by the Netherlands intelligence services in exposing Russian GRU officers in October 2018 is indicative of a number of new trends in state handling of cyber conflict. US public indictments of foreign state intelligence officials, and the UK's deliberate provision of information allowing the global media to "dox" GRU officers implicated in the Salisbury poison attack in early 2018, set a precedent for revealing information that previously would have been confidential. This is a major departure from previous practice where the details of state-sponsored cyber attacks would only be discovered through lengthy investigative journalism (as with Stuxnet) or through the efforts of cybersecurity corporations (as with Red October). This paper uses case studies to illustrate the nature of this departure and consider its impact, including potentially substantial implications for state handling of cyber conflict. The paper examines these implications, including: * The effect of transparency on perception of conflict. Greater public knowledge of attacks will lead to greater public acceptance that countermeasures should be taken. This may extend to public preparedness to accept that a state of declared or undeclared war exists with a cyber aggressor. * The resulting effect on legality. This adds a new element to the long-running debates on the legality of cyber attacks or counter-attacks, by affecting the point at which a state of conflict is politically and socially, even if not legally, judged to exist. * The further resulting effect on permissions and authorities to conduct cyber attacks, in the form of adjustment to the glaring imbalance between the means and methods available to aggressors (especially those who believe themselves already to be in conflict) and defenders. Greater openness has already intensified public and political questioning of the restraint shown by NATO and EU nations in responding to Russian actions; this trend will continue. * Consequences for deterrence, both specifically within cyber conflict and also more broadly deterring hostile actions. In sum, the paper brings together the direct and immediate policy implications, for a range of nations and for NATO, of the new apparent policy of transparency.

URLhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8756713
DOI10.23919/CYCON.2019.8756713
Citation Keygiles_silent_2019