U.S. official says cyberattacks can trigger self-defense rule
Source: Washington Post
Cyberattacks can amount to armed attacks triggering the right of self-defense and are subject to international laws of war, the State Departments top lawyer said Tuesday.
Spelling out the U.S. governments position on the rules governing cyberwarfare, Harold Koh, the departments legal adviser, said a cyber-operation that results in death, injury or significant destruction would probably be seen as a use of force in violation of international law.
In the United States view, any illegal use of force potentially triggers the right of national self-defense, Koh said.
Cyberattacks that cause a nuclear plant meltdown, open a dam above a populated area or disable an air-traffic control system resulting in plane crashes are examples of activity that probably would constitute an illegal use of force, he said.
Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-official-says-cyberattacks-can-trigger-self-defense-rule/2012/09/18/c2246c1a-0202-11e2-b260-32f4a8db9b7e_story.html
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I can foresee this policy going sour quickly.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)We're special, after all.
Hell, claiming a country has WMDs and not being able to produce them after killing a few hundred thousand people probably ought to rank above a cyberattack.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)cstanleytech
(26,080 posts)if in the unlikely event someone was able to hack into say something major like say air traffic control and was threatening to send false info to random flights or if say one of the nuclear reactors in the country got hacked and someone threatened to do something that would cause the cooling pumps to shutdown but it would have to be something really reallllllyyyyyyy major.
Poll_Blind
(23,864 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)Anti-virus software makers Symantec Corp of the United States and Kaspersky Lab of Russia disclosed on Monday that they have found evidence that Flame's operators may have also worked with three other viruses that have yet to be discovered.
The two security firms, which conducted their analyses separately, declined to comment on who was behind Flame. But current and former Western national security officials have told Reuters that the United States played a role in creating Flame. The Washington Post has reported that Israel was also involved.
Current and former U.S. government sources also told Reuters that the United States was behind Stuxnet. Kaspersky and Symantec linked Stuxnet to Flame in June, saying that part of the Flame program is nearly identical to code found in a 2009 version of Stuxnet.
....................................................................................
Kaspersky and Symantec released their findings in reports describing analysis of command and control servers used to communicate with and control computers infected with Flame.
http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/09/18/238724.html
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Sounds about par for the course.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)to have international protocols on this?
This should be subject to international agreements, laws maybe?
Couldn't hurt, maybe?
We would like to be safe enough not to have to worry about these threats. What other countries might agree with us to prohibit such cyberattacks? Maybe not Iran? But maybe a lot of other countries. I think some DUers are expecting unilateral compliance with this and naively think that only the US is capable of cyberattacks that harm infrastructure. But I disagree. I think treaties and protocols are appropriate to govern cyberactivity that could cost lives, that could be a substitute for warfare or terrorism.
The problem with Iran is the fact that they have not respected diplomatic immunity in the past and that they are possibly trying to develop nuclear weapons but are not willing to enter into agreements to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes only.
Nihil
(13,508 posts)http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-57515312-75/german-government-tells-public-to-stop-using-internet-explorer/
> The fallout from this weekend's discovery of security holes in several versions
> of Internet Explorer continues to spread. The latest: Germany is urging its citizens
> to stop using Internet Explorer until there's a fix.
>
> "A fast spreading of the code has to be feared," the German government's Federal
> Office for Information Security, or BSI, said. The BSI recommended that users access
> the Internet using alternative Web browsers until Microsoft's security update
> becomes available.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)I did not understand why Linux owners were so happy with their puters.
Till we switched over a couple years ago.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)...it's no longer something we can pretend to deny, and we're expecting wide-scale retaliation...We're hoping this legal interpretation will be enough to scare just a few of the would-be avengers away..."
on point
(2,506 posts)Is that what we are saying?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)We are going to do whatever the hell we want, that's perfectly clear, because that is what we have been doing. If you look at the last 60 years of US history, you find that there is nothing that we will not do. All these after the fact and prospective justifications for doing whatever we want are just bullshit.