4 ms·
>Wasn't this more intelligence gathering? I believe it raised to a level above spying and intelligence gathering. It was a state sponsored military act of cyb
by throwaway_tech 7y ago
>Wasn't this more intelligence gathering?
I believe it raised to a level above spying and intelligence gathering. It was a state sponsored military act of cyber warfare that infringed on the US' territorial sovereignty.
>The appropriate response would be more akin to hacking back into China's social credit scoring company and snooping around.
The purpose of a proportionate response to military acts under the UN Charter and the use of force and armed conflict is not so much "an eye for an eye" (i.e. you hack me, I hack you), but to put an end to the military operations infringing on your sovereignty ...for example, assuming you believe Iraq had WMDs and chemical weapons or response is not to create stock piles of our own chemical weapons.
- alwayseasy 7y agoI agree and believe the US probably are having a hard time creating escalation mechanisms for cyberwarfare and signaling their strategic needs and interests. When the United State's entire democratic apparatus was attacked during the presidential elections and the only answer was a similar indictment of Russian hackers, enemies have a harder time knowing what is and isn't a "red line".