Don't you think it's also dangerous? There were stories that US power plants could be made inoperable. Also how do you really monitor bad actors using those vu

Don't you think it's also dangerous? There were stories that US power plants could be made inoperable. Also how do you really monitor bad actors using those vulnerabilities to do other kinds of damages? To me it doesn't seem cyber weapons are that easy to use, they're volatile, secret, can be fired very quickly without sound, and are very difficult to control. So far one could say the security market was not big enough, and computers not widespread enough, so it was tolerable to let the 0day market open as long as the US has the upper hand, but as this market goes bigger, damages are going to show up more and more. Having the upper hand in term of cyber warfare is one thing, but I have a problem with what the cyber warfare terminology. I'd rather live in a world where weapon trafficking is neutered, instead of a world where bandits can cause damages (small, but still damage). I think the day is coming where higher security standards will be required by law, because the swiss cheese strategy won't work for long. Also, I have doubts that the NSA can really keep the upper hand because they have more brainpower. The cyber warfare is not only the sum of the weapons, because anybody can be taught computer security and learn how to build weapons.