Guns & Drugs on the Deep Web

tristayifei at January 29,2015
I felt scared only thinking about the cyberwar issue in the future. Nowadays technology has became more advanced and abroad, and it will continue grow even faster in the future. The issue of cyberwar is an avoidable topic. The video talks about building new international laws. The laws should be strict and clear about the cyberwar. I think the new international laws may face difficulties when establish, but this is a good way to protect countries and decrease sacrifices.

skatakam at January 29,2015
Defining a cyber-warfare without collaboration of Nations, describing what exactly is considered as a threat to them, would be a difficult task. Nations should come together to develop and agree upon a universally acceptable cyber law. This would help prosecuting the techies who use the computers in a wrong way, for which they were not meant to. Independent laws pertaining to their nation in the field of computers must be strengthened and strictly implemented, in order to maintain prosperous relations between nations and also to maintain peace which will eventually contribute to the existence of world peace.

gmazur at January 31,2015
The video raises some good questions with regards to cyber war. However, I must point out that there are some points that are factually in correct. First cyberspace warfare is covered under US laws of armed conflict (LOAC). Not questioning what other nations consider acts of war, but it is clearly defined by US law. Over simply stated, if effects delivered through cyberspace do the same of as what is done in the kinetic world, example drop a bomb on a building, Soldiers fighting in battle, or Navy ships launching missiles. The uninformed press often makes the mistake of referring to the stealing information as an act of war, when by definition it is considered espionage, not war. With regards to assassinations, there are international treaties that prohibit the assassination of leaders during peacetime. However, during declared hostilities, if someone or something is considered a valid military target, it may be engaged kinetically or otherwise, i.e. attacking the leaders pacemaker as the video implied. Additionally, there is no such thing as a defensive cyber attack, what the video is describing is an offensive cyber attack. Clearly this an act of war as described by current international treaties. Where the lines blur with war in cyberspace is attribution can be difficult to prove. However, both US and international laws are clear, the political or military commander issuing the order to execute is responsible for the actions. The framework and laws exist, but enforcing them in a cyberspace scenario will be difficult.

connellyt at February 01,2015
I think the current frameworks describing acts of war work just as well for the examples given in the video. Just as we don't hold the mechanic or engineer that builds a weapon responsible for what happens with that weapon, the engineer that builds the computer system that is used to attack wouldn't be responsible for what happens with that system. I agree with the previous poster, that the press is throwing around the term war, when it is really espionage. Bruce Schneier wrote a really good article on the subject in 2013 that still applies today, and I recommend reading it: https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2013/03/rhetoric_of_cyber_wa.html.

djohns54 at February 05,2015
In response to this video, I believe that the same powers that be should get together and draft up sometime type of international declaration that constitutes what is legal and what is illegal in terms of cyber warfare and who would be responsible for enabling the attackers to carry out their malicious intentions on the victims. Just as nation states have evolved and adapted to then changes in traditional armed and unarmed conflicts, this should be no different in relations to how we can address this growing problem. I agree with skatakam's post that was written on Jan. 29, 2015, that in order to define cyber-warfare, there needs to be a collaboration of Nations describing what exactly is considered as a threat to them. Although it would be hard, it'd be a great step in the direction of being able to bring offenders to justice along with their employers.