via RS Hack - "it's not clear if deliberate sabotage qualifies as "war" " - http://ow.ly/dM7SB
@Wh1t3Rabbit Per Tallinn, the "cyber attack" definition includes "damage or destruction to objects". Stuxnet would then qualify.
-
-
@attritionorg Big Q then-Does that give Iran the right to declare war under international rules of war? Against WHOM though is the follow-up -
@Wh1t3Rabbit@attritionorg "right" to declare war? Lulz. The word you are looking for is "pretext". -
@ErrataRob@attritionorg Fine, you're right. Point is even if there was loss of life, whom do you declare war against?? -
@Wh1t3Rabbit@ErrataRob welcome to the age old "attribution" debate. -
@attritionorg@erratarob Seems to always come down to pin the "bad" on the right person, or nation. -
@Wh1t3Rabbit@ErrataRob Sure, but difference between doing it in media and rhetoric, and as justification for kinetic response. -
@attritionorg@ErrataRob In all seriousness, what evidence would be needed to be 'sure'... where's the "smoking gun"? What is enough? -
@Wh1t3Rabbit@ErrataRob Some argue, quite convincingly, that 100% air tight attribution is simply impossible. - 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@attritionorg@Wh1t3Rabbit interesting little fact: under intl. law a cyber attack can only be claimed by the victim state. Count: 0. -
@erwinkooi which international law exactly? -
@attritionorg law of armed conflict. -
@erwinkooi Isn't the LOAC a decidedly U.S. policy? -
@attritionorg interesting, let me check...
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.