Cybersecurity (The race for cyberspace dominance)

Nowadays, smartphones, computers, and the internet play such an important role in our modern lives that it is difficult to imagine how we would function without them (Kim. S & Shresta. R, 2020). From banking services and online purchases to e-mail and social media, it is more important than ever to take precautions to prevent cybercriminals from gaining access to our accounts, data, and devices. This is why cybersecurity is so important (Hammoudeh. M & Loyola-Gonzalez. O, 2020). The primary function of cybersecurity is to protect our devices and all of the services to which we have access while online and at work from theft or damage. It is also important to prevent unauthorized access to large amounts of personal information that we store on these devices or that we access online (Kim. S & Shresta. R, 2020). As a result, cyber-security is the process by which individuals and organizations reduce the risk of cyberattacks (Hammoudeh. M & Loyola-Gonzalez. O, 2020). So, what are the risks encountered by cybersecurity, and what are the measures and methods used to avoid these risks? This article will provide a general overview of cybersecurity, its relationship with the Internet in the global economy, and the role of cybersecurity in protecting the global economy from cyber threats and attacks. We will also discuss the cyber revolution in international relations, the threats to international relations, and the race to control cybersecurity.

The cyberspace has become an essential part of today's generation of men and women; through instant communications and electronic messages in banking, travel, education, and purchasing, the Internet has touched every aspect of life (Kshetri. N, n.d). Individuals' increasing use of the Internet has made cyber-security an essential component for protecting our personal information (Moskowitz. S, 2017). The flow of data is the foundation of the global economy (Kshetri. N, n.d). With the current acceleration in the globalization of businesses, aided by the rapid adoption of evolving technologies such as cloud computing and data analysis, the importance of data as an input into industries has grown, and this is true not only for information industries, but also for manufacturing and traditional industries. The adoption of Internet is inextricably linked to economic development (Karake. C & Al Qasmi. L, 2010). The fact that higher Internet penetration is strongly related to a variety of economic success indicators suggests that achieving universal access requires not only telecom sector reforms, but also policies aimed at assisting individuals and businesses in getting the most out of Internet (Moskowitz. S, 2017). As a result, Internet and economic development are mutually reinforcing (Easttom.C & Tawalbeh.L, 2020). The internet has changed our way of life, our way of working, our way of socializing and meeting new people, and the way our countries are developing (Karake & Al Qasmi, 2010). We've seen that Internet and cyberspace play an important and positive role in shaping the global economy (Gartzke.E, 2019).

As a result, it is critical that the cyberspace receives adequate protection against illegal and unlicensed activities for which there are no ready-made solutions (Deibert.R. J & Kello. Crete-Nishihata, 2020). Individuals and organizations are being subjected to terrifying cyber-attacks that result in massive financial losses (Kshetri. N, n.d). According to the Center for International and Strategic Studies, approximately 1% of the global PIB is lost each year as a result of cybercrime, with the cost of cybercrime potentially reaching 600 billion US dollars (Moskowitz. S, 2017). The report also mentions that the monetisation of stolen data appears to be becoming less difficult as black markets for cybercrime and the use of digital currencies improve (Moskowitz. S, 2017). According to another 2019 study, cybercrime is the greatest threat to all businesses worldwide and one of the most serious problems with which humanity is confronted (Karake. C & Al Qasmi. L, 2010). "Cybersecurity Ventures" forecasts that cybercrime will cost the world more than $6 billion per year by 2021, up from $3 billion in 2015. (Ruan. K, 2019). According to the report, this is the largest economic transfer in history; cybercrime jeopardizes incentives to innovate and invest, and will be more profitable than the global trade of all major illicit drugs combined (Rim. S & Shresta. R, 2020).

Clearly, cybersecurity plays a critical role in the security of not only global businesses and their infrastructures, but also the safety and well-being of people all over the world, while also ensuring the global economy's success (Easttom. C & Tawalbeh. L, 2020). As a result, in order to have effective cybersecurity around the world, some steps must be taken (Kshetri. N, n.d). Every business must follow secure practices and produce secure products and services, as well as educate its employees thoroughly on safe and secure practices (Moskowitz. S, 2017). Every country's government must take steps to educate its citizens about cyber security, as well as to align risk management and information technology activities, and to regulate private and public sector businesses to ensure compliance (Ruan. K, 2019). As stated in the United States' 2018 National Cyber strategy, the voluntary and universal adoption of acceptable cyber standards and international law for responsible state behavior in the cyberspace will provide increased predictability and stability in the cyberspace (Rim. S & Shresta. R, 2020). Countries must work together to create a secure cyberspace and to authorize legitimate extradition requests for criminals located abroad (Lindsay.J.R & Kello. L, 2014). Companies, universities, and industrial associations such as ISACA must develop and maintain qualified human resources in cyber security (Ruan. K, 2019).

The countries must have strong detection and dissuasion capabilities in the cyberspace, as well as a solid incident response mechanism (Ruan. K, 2019). Companies must adhere to the NIST Cybersecurity Framework and ISACA guidelines in order to conduct a comparative analysis of best practices. Finally, all countries should promote Internet freedom and a multi-party governance model, as well as the development of interoperable and reliable communication infrastructure and Internet connectivity. This will result in a strong information and knowledge economy, which will eventually lead to a world-leading economy (Moskowitz. S, 2017).

Cybersecurity is an integral part of government policies and doctrines concerning national defense, foreign policy, and security, contributing to the development of cyber-security as a new field of warfare (Gartzke.E, 2019). The efforts to develop road rules for the cyberspace focus on the applicability of existing international law, potential gaps, the development of standards, confidence-building measures, and potential dissuasion postures.

As a result, a complex set of cyber-security regimes has evolved, encompassing a number of regional and international institutions that play critical roles in the development of policy responses (Winterfeld.S & Rogers.R, 2019). The cyber domain has had a significant impact on the evolution of international security and the concept of security itself (Kshetri.N, n.d). The new cyber dimension of international relations is a major challenge for theories of power preservation and intimidation (Maness.R.C & Valeriano.B, 2016). The cyber threats are grave, destabilizing, and growing (Kim.S & Shresta.R, 2020). The intimidation theories and strategies developed and implemented during the Cold War cannot be used in the cyber domain (Winterfeld.S & Rogers.R, 2019) Many scientists are working to understand the impact of cyber-revolution on international relations (Maness.R.C & Valeriano.B, 2016). The authorities have also taken some cooperative measures, particularly in the area of criminality and the establishment of CERT (computer emergency response teams) (Lindsay.J. R & Kello.L, 2014).

The processes of internationalization and globalization have resulted in greater cohesion and efforts toward unified global order regulation than existed in the system of sovereign states during the Cold War (Gartzke.E, 2019). This is reflected in the heart of policy and in the security of nations. In this context, a new concept, human security, has emerged in political theory and practice (Kim.S & Shresta.R, 2020). In contrast to the traditional concept of national security, she focuses on the security of an individual rather than the security of the state (Deibert.R. J & Crete-Nishihata, 2020). Few countries have nuclear weapons, and the number of potential adversaries is limited, limiting the use of intimidation (Hammoudeh.M & Loyola-Gonzalez.O, 2020). When it comes to the cyberspace, the situation is completely different (Gartzke.E, 2019). In contrast to nuclear weapons, every state has access to cyber "arms," and such attacks cannot be directly linked to a state action. The defense of national infrastructure against cyber-attacks may become another shared interest among states (Gartzke.E, 2019). According to experts and analysts, Russia and China have dominated the cyberspace in recent years, and their efforts have become so intense that any lag in this area could pose a significant problem for the modern West (Deibert.R.J & Crete-Nishihata, 2020). The cyber-attack, which can occur as a result of a conflict between states, a terrorist or criminal act, is referred to as a cyberspace attack with the goal of compromising an electronic or network system, as well as compromising a physical system, as was the case with the cyber-attack against Sony Pictures Entertainment and the terrorist attacks in Paris (Gartzke.E, 2019).

Cybersecurity and cyber defense are two areas that are becoming priorities in government defense programs, owing primarily to the rise of cyber-espionage and cyber-threats emanating from the Internet (Hammoudeh.M & Loyola-Gonzalez.O, 2020). In order to categorize cybercrime, a United Nations study on cybercrime gathers the perspectives of member countries and private-sector organizations on the most serious cybercrime threats (Kim.S & Shresta.R, 2020). Based on these viewpoints, a possible list of cyber threats (the first figure refers to the viewpoints of member countries, and the second to the viewpoints of the private sector) is developed (Kim.S & Shresta.R, 2020). Computer crimes that cause bodily harm or endanger children (28 % - 6 % ), Infractions relating to computer identity (5 %?- 2 % ), Violation of privacy or data protection laws (2 %?- 18 % ), Computer acts in support of terrorist offenses (5% - 0%), Computer related fraud and counterfeiting (24% - 8%), Sending or controlling the sending of SPAM (2 % - 6 %), Infractions relating to intellectual property and computer trade marks (3 % - 8 %), production, distribution, or possession of malicious computer tools (2 % - 0 %), unauthorized access, interception, or acquisition of computer data (13 % - 23 %), unauthorized access to a computer system (9 % - 19 %), and unauthorized data interception or system damage (7 % - 10 % ).

There is an important point in the data analysis of cybercrime and cyber-espionage that says it is difficult to obtain a complete set of data (Kim.S & Shresta.R, 2020). As a result, various sources and websites have been examined in order to obtain a comprehensive and up-to-date picture of the current state of cyber-espionage. According to The Economist, there is little precision in estimates of the number of businesses affected by cybercrime or the costs associated with it (Hammoudeh.M & Loyola-Gonzalez.O, 2020). Data is collected not only by governments and businesses, but also by researchers and experts such as Paolo Passeri, author of Hackmaggedon, a leading industry blog that compiles information and data on cyber-attacks (Kshetrin.N, n.d). The reports are generally a mix of business and public diplomacy and point to various data and actors involved in cyberattacks depending on the country of origin. Verizon, for example, claims that China is responsible for 96% of all cyber espionage supported by the government (Kim.S & Shresta.R, 2020). According to Kaspersky, Russia is the most attacked country in the world, and 44 percent of Web attacks neutralized by Kaspersky Lab products were carried out using malicious Web resources located in the United States and Germany (Deibert.R. J & Crete-Nishihata, 2020). And reciprocal cyber espionage accusations have surfaced in the media, highlighting the tensions between the United States and China.

Cyberattacks, which can occur as a result of a conflict between states, a terrorist or criminal act, is a cyberspace attack with the goal of compromising a computer system or network, but also of compromising systems, as was the case with the Stuxnet virus. A hacker attack is referred to by the most commonly used terms in the media (Kim.S & Shresta.R, 2020). The same methods used in a pirate attack are used in military operations as well as terrorist operations. The most obvious way to combat cyber threats is to multiply difficult attacks for potential attackers while improving the security of cyber-technology systems (Deibert.R. J & Crete-Nishihata, 2020). In addition to passive dissuasion, an increasing number of states are opting for dissuasion of cyber aggression by other countries (Kshetrin.N, n.d).

Active dissuasion entails dissuading potential cyber attackers by emphasizing the possibility of repercussions (Kshetrin.N, n.d). The suppression of cyberattacks could be accomplished, for example, through measures of retaliation within the cyber domain itself, such as diplomatic or economic sanctions, or through a conventional military action against the perpetrator (Lindsay.J. R & Kello, 2014). In 2014, for example, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) decided that a cyberattack against one of its members would be considered an attack under Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty, allowing the alliance to take action against the cyber attacker (Maness.R.C & Valeriano.B, 2016). In some ways, dissuasion will undoubtedly raise the bar for cyber-aggressors (Winterfeld.S & Rogers.R, 2019). A potential attacker's cost-benefit calculation will undoubtedly be influenced by potential recovery measures (Winterfeld.S & Rogers.R, 2019).

However, due to the various characteristics of the cyber domain, it is relatively difficult to employ active dissuasion as a tool against cyber attackers (Kshetri.N, n.d). The main impediment to the effectiveness of these dissuasion policies is the issue of attribution (Kshetri.N, n.d). It is extremely difficult to identify the perpetrators of cyberattacks (non-reported) in a conclusive manner (Winterfeld.S & Rogers.R, 2019). Cyber arms differ from other weapons in that their origins are not clearly visible and traceable (Winterfeld.S & Rogers.R, 2019). For example, attackers may use a network of pirated or infected computers without the owners of these computers being aware of any criminal activity (Winterfeld.S & Rogers.R, 2019). Even if it is technically possible to identify the source of a cyber-attack using IP addresses, it is still possible that the identified source is simply a Mallon in the attack chain and that the owner was not knowingly involved in the attack.

Furthermore, state actors can minimize their involvement by allowing non-state actors (such as hacker groups) to carry out cyberattacks (Deibert.R.J & Crete-Nishihata, 2020). Non-state actors, on the other hand, can create a false association with a given state. More and more, cyber attackers have the ability to strike in a very short period of time and immediately erase their trail. Identifying the sources of an attack, on the other hand, is a difficult and time-consuming process (Kim.S & Shresta.R, 2020).

As a result, taking retaliatory measures during or immediately following an attack is nearly impossible (Kim.S & Shresta.R, 2020). Because it is difficult to establish the identity of the perpetrator of a cyberattack with absolute certainty, especially if the perpetrator denies responsibility, there is a risk of repercussions against an innocent party. In practice, few government actors are willing to take this risk, as cyber attackers are well aware (Hammoudeh.M & Loyola-Gonzalez.O, 2020). It is possible to argue that in some cases, irrefutable and conclusive evidence is not required, and that restitutionary measures can be taken if it is practically certain that a particular state or non-state actor was involved or did not attempt to attack (Kshetri.N, n.d). However, even if it is desirable to take this route despite the risks of making false accusations, the question remains whether such an approach is effectively permitted by international law. It's another area of cyberspace where advancements are being made (Deibert.R. J & Crete-Nishihata, 2020).

The United States, Russia, and China are well-known for their qualified cyber-military units. In addition to the aforementioned countries, France and Israel are working on developing cyber capabilities. According to American intelligence agents, there are 20 to 30 armies with respectable cyber-warfare capabilities, including Taiwan, Iran, Australia, the Republic of Korea, India, Pakistan, and several NATO countries (Hammoudeh.M & Loyola-Gonzalez.O, 2020). The United States Cyber Command, along with the agencies with which it works, has some of the most intelligent and patriotic civilians, both military and civilian, who create plans and capabilities for dominance in cyberspace with the goal of preserving national security and peace (Deibert.R. J & Crete-Nishihata, 2020).

Strategic dominance in the cyberspace has yet to be achieved by one of the international relations entities. Without a doubt, this is the goal of many countries, including the United States, China, and Russia (Kshetri.N, n.d). However, regardless of how much they may invest in their defense and offensive capabilities, the power system has yet to be implemented. In contrast to the Cold War's division of the world into two centers of power, offensive intimidation and capabilities are not critical in the cyberspace, where there are numerous centers of power. The strength of these nations is primarily determined by their ability to establish an adequate defense system, which is also influenced by their reliance on information infrastructure. The degree of reliance on information infrastructure correlates with the level of economic vulnerability and the number of militarily developed countries (Deibert.R. J & Crete-Nishihata, 2020).?The strength of these nations is primarily determined by their ability to establish an adequate defense system, which is also influenced by their reliance on information infrastructure. The degree of reliance on information infrastructure correlates with the level of economic vulnerability and the number of militarily developed countries (Kim.S & Shresta.R, 2020).

To conclude, this field will remain interesting and stimulating due to the intensification of international relations in cyberspace, which is conditioned and supported by the rapid development of technologies and their application in the relations of states, organizations, and individuals. As a result, cyber security will always be a competition between attackers who exploit or seek to exploit a new vulnerability and defenders who work to close a security gap as soon as possible. As a result, it is necessary to organize systemic education and to strengthen military, intelligence, law enforcement, and civil defense centers against cyberattacks. Finally, cybersecurity has become one of the prerequisites for the democratic way of life in modern society.

References:

Alsmadi, I., Easttom, C., & Tawalbeh, L. (2020).?The NICE cyber security framework: Cyber security management. Springer International Publishing AG. Retrieved from The NICE Cyber Security Framework | SpringerLink (ndu.edu.lb)

Andress, J., Winterfeld, S., & Rogers, R. (2019).?Cyber warfare: Techniques, tactics and tools for security practitioners. Syngress/Elsevier. Retrieved from OLIB WebView (ndu.edu.lb)

Deibert, R. J., & Crete-Nishihata, M. (2020). Global governance and the spread of cyberspace controls.?Global Governance,?18(3), 339-361.?https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-01803006

Gartzke, E. (2019). The myth of cyberwar: Bringing war in cyberspace back down to earth.?International Security,?38(2), 41-73.?https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00136

Karake-Shalhoub, Z., & Al Qasimi, L. (2010).?Cyber law and cyber security in developing and emerging economies. Edward Elgar. Retrieved from OLIB WebView (ndu.edu.lb)

Kim, S., & Shrestha, R. (2020). Automotive cyber security: Introduction, challenges, and standardization. Springer Singapore Pte. Limited. Retrieved from Automotive Cyber Security | SpringerLink (ndu.edu.lb)

Kshetri, N.The quest to cyber superiority: Cybersecurity regulations, frameworks, and strategies of major economies. Springer International Publishing.?https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40554-4

Lindsay, J. R., & Kello, L. (2014). A cyber disagreement.?International Security,?39(2), 181-192. Retrieved from A Cyber Disagreement on JSTOR (ndu.edu.lb)

Maness, R. C., & Valeriano, B. (2016). The impact of cyber conflict on international interactions.?Armed Forces and Society,?42(2), 301-323.?https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X15572997

Moskowitz, S. (2017).?Cybercrime and business: Strategies for global corporate security. Elsevier Science & Technology. Retrieved from ProQuest Ebook Central - Detail page (ndu.edu.lb)

Ruan, K. (2019).?Digital asset valuation and cyber risk measurement: Principles of cybernomics. Elsevier Science & Technology. Retrieved from ProQuest Ebook Central - Detail page (ndu.edu.lb)

Xu, Z., Parizi, R. M., Hammoudeh, M., & Loyola-González, O. (2020).?Cyber security intelligence and analytics: Proceedings of the 2020 international conference on cyber security intelligence and analytics (CSIA 2020), volume 1. Springer International Publishing AG. Retrieved from Cyber Security Intelligence and Analytics | SpringerLink (ndu.edu.lb)