August 14, 2018

Battlefield Internet

A Plan for Securing Cyberspace

Cyberspace has been recognized as a new arena for competition among states ever since it came into existence. In the United States, there have long been warnings of a “cyber–Pearl Harbor”—a massive digital attack that could cripple the country’s critical infrastructure without a single shot being fired. Presidential commissions, military task force reports, and congressional investigations have been calling attention to such a risk for decades. In 1984, the Reagan administration warned of the “significant security challenges” of the coming information age. And just this year, Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, said of such threats, “the lights are blinking red.”

Yet the Internet has always been much more than a venue for conflict and competition; it is the backbone of global commerce and communication. That said, cyberspace is not, as is often thought, simply part of the global commons in the way that the air or the sea is. States assert jurisdiction over, and companies claim ownership of, the physical infrastructure that composes the Internet and the data that traverses it. States and companies built the Internet, and both are responsible for maintaining it. Actions taken in the public sector affect the private sector, and vice versa. In this way, the Internet has always been hybrid in nature.

So, accordingly, is the real cyberwar threat. It turns out that for all the increasingly vehement warnings about a cyber–Pearl Harbor, states have shown little appetite for using cyberattacks for large-scale destruction. The immediate threat is more corrosive than explosive. States are using the tools of cyberwarfare to undermine the very foundation of the Internet: trust. They are hacking into banks, meddling in elections, stealing intellectual property, and bringing private companies to a standstill. The result is that an arena that the world relies on for economic and informational exchange has turned into an active battlefield.


Read the Full Article at Foreign Affairs

  • Video
    • January 24, 2025
    PONI Live Debate: AI Integration in NC3

    Dr. Paul Scharre, executive vice president and director of studies at the Center for New American Security joins in a live debate moderated to discuss AI Integration in NC3. ...

    By Paul Scharre

  • Commentary
    • January 22, 2025
    Sharper: Trump's First 100 Days

    Donald Trump takes office in a complex and volatile global environment. Rising tensions with China, the continued war in Ukraine, and instability in the Middle East all pose s...

    By Charles Horn

  • Commentary
    • January 20, 2025
    Accelerate America’s Quantum Technology Leadership

    As the U.S.-China competition for quantum technology leadership continues to intensify, the Trump administration should prioritize both advancing and protecting the country’s ...

    By Constanza M. Vidal Bustamante

  • Commentary
    • January 20, 2025
    Secure America’s Tech Competitiveness

    The Trump administration must bolster America’s science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce and broader technological competitiveness—documented shortag...

    By Sam Howell

View All Reports View All Articles & Multimedia