The article doesn't critically analyze the whole thing at all. Merely a single line obliquely drops a hint that there's some uncertainty involved about "attacks

The article doesn't critically analyze the whole thing at all. Merely a single line obliquely drops a hint that there's some uncertainty involved about "attacks" in the "electronic world" in general: Traditional deterrents don’t work as well in the electronic world, where it can be hard to detect who is responsible for an attack and even harder to negotiate with them. The only real information from actual government officials is that it merits an "appropriate response" -- the article sets up the reader to think that this response should be against North Korea, when we aren't given any context at all as to whether or not actual government officials think that should be the case. It's disappointing to see these low-on-details, high-on-chest beating pieces being cranked out.