Of course, in the end it is just conflict, and when it spills over into the real world then you have a war. But this is not always the case We have already had disruption in power grids, nuclear plants, hospitals, public offices, critical infrastructure of financial markets (some of them with impact in real lives) without retaliation in the physical world.
Cyberwar, in my perspective, have some nuances. For instance, in a physical conflict, a hostile nation’s invasion of my property immediately becomes a state issue. However, this isn’t always the case in a cyberwar if a hostile state invades my organization (It’s hard to immediately distinguish whether the actor is a nation state, a financially motivated group, hacktivists, or just a guy who eats pizza in his mom’s basement). Most of the time, organizations are on their own.
In a cyberwar, espionage is also far more acceptable. This is something the NSA (and FSB/SVR) has been doing for years (against private entities and states). In a way, I understand that it is something similar to what the cold war was (is), but with no boots on the ground.
I’d say we’ve been at cyber war since 1995 if not earlier. In spite of social media and attempted censorship, the internet is still a very chaotic and ungovernable place. This IS where a lot of people go because they want to not be judged while they view weird fetish art or have non-heterosexual and/or transgender relationships, and as far as I’m concerned, the right to do so should be engraved in every legal system on the planet. Most people online seem to agree, hence the fediverse (Mastodon, kbin, etc.), so I assume true order isn’t coming to the internet any time soon.
Cyber war, of course. I think that there is a cyber war going on for quite some time now. CWWI (Cyber World War I).
If it’s affecting the operations of real-world systems and it’s intended to induce panic, it’s arguably beyond “cyber”, no?
Of course, in the end it is just conflict, and when it spills over into the real world then you have a war. But this is not always the case We have already had disruption in power grids, nuclear plants, hospitals, public offices, critical infrastructure of financial markets (some of them with impact in real lives) without retaliation in the physical world.
Cyberwar, in my perspective, have some nuances. For instance, in a physical conflict, a hostile nation’s invasion of my property immediately becomes a state issue. However, this isn’t always the case in a cyberwar if a hostile state invades my organization (It’s hard to immediately distinguish whether the actor is a nation state, a financially motivated group, hacktivists, or just a guy who eats pizza in his mom’s basement). Most of the time, organizations are on their own.
In a cyberwar, espionage is also far more acceptable. This is something the NSA (and FSB/SVR) has been doing for years (against private entities and states). In a way, I understand that it is something similar to what the cold war was (is), but with no boots on the ground.
I’d say we’ve been at cyber war since 1995 if not earlier. In spite of social media and attempted censorship, the internet is still a very chaotic and ungovernable place. This IS where a lot of people go because they want to not be judged while they view weird fetish art or have non-heterosexual and/or transgender relationships, and as far as I’m concerned, the right to do so should be engraved in every legal system on the planet. Most people online seem to agree, hence the fediverse (Mastodon, kbin, etc.), so I assume true order isn’t coming to the internet any time soon.