Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-pfhbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T20:30:47.851Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Global Cyberterrorism, Jurisdiction, and International Organization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2009

Joel P. Trachtman
Affiliation:
Professor of International Law, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University
Mark F. Grady
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
Francesco Parisi
Affiliation:
George Mason University, Virginia
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

The rise of cyberspace has greatly facilitated all kinds of activity, including commercial, social, and governmental interaction. There is no doubt that cyberspace today constitutes valuable real estate indeed. We have also routed our control of many real-world processes through cyberspace. Because of this increased value, the security of cyberspace has grown in importance.

The rise of cyberspace and the rise of terrorism may be understood as antagonists in a modernist drama. Both have evolved from state sponsorship into relatively independent and decentralized phenomena. Both exist outside the state. Both use network forms of organization alongside other forms of organization. Cyberspace is both a tool and a target of terrorists. It could also be a tool against terrorists. Most critically, cyberspace is a tool of human interaction and commerce, while terrorism is the nemesis of human interaction and commerce. So, these forces, although similar in structure, are natural opponents.

The rise of terrorism, as one type of asymmetric and distributed warfare, has threatened not only the gains derived from cyberspace but the activities that now come to depend on communication through cyberspace infrastructure. Individuals and governments wish to ensure that they will continue to reap the benefits of cyberspace and that cyberspace controls will not be turned against them. Their enemies see cyberspace as a high-value target. And indeed, during Al Qaeda's reign in Afghanistan, it developed an academy of cyberterrorism, seeking means to attack the cyberspace infrastructure of the West (Gellman 2002).

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, Kenneth W. 1987. Collective Goods, Mobile Resources, and Extraterritorial Trade Controls. Law and Contemporary Problems 50:117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W.. 1989. Modern International Relations Theory: A Prospectus for International Lawyers. Yale International Law Journal 14:335Google Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W.. 1993. Trust but Verify: The Production of Information in Arms Control Treaties and Other International Agreements. Cornell International Law Journal 26:1Google Scholar
American Law Institute. 1987. Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law. Philadelphia: American Law Institute
Anderson, Terry, and Hill, Peter. 1975. The Evolution of Property Rights: A Study of the American West. Journal of Law and Economics 18:163CrossRef
Ault, David, and Rutman, Gilbert. 1979. The Development of Independent Rights to Property in Tribal Africa. Journal of Law and Economics 22:183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, Scott. 2003. Environment and Statecraft: Strategies of Environmental Treaty-Making. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basu, Kaushik. 1998. Social Norms and the Law. In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and the Law, ed. Newman, Peter, 476. New York: Palgrave MacmillanCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benkler, Yochai. 2002. Coase's Penguin, or, Linux and the Nature of the Firm. Yale Law Journal 112:369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, James. 1997. Foucault in Cyberspace: Surveillance, Sovereignty, and Hardwired Censors. University of Cincinnati Law Review 66:177Google Scholar
Brams, Steven J., and Kilgour, D. Marc. 1988. Game Theory and National Security. Oxford: Basil BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Brenner, Susan W., and Goodman, Marc D.. 2002. In Defense of Cyberterrorism: An Argument for Anticipating Cyber-Attacks. Illinois Journal of Law, Technology, and Policy 2002:1Google Scholar
Buchanan, James M. 1965. An Economic Theory of Clubs. Economica 32:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busch, Marc, and Reinhardt, Eric. 1993. Nice Strategies in a World of Relative Gains: The Problem of Cooperation under Anarchy. Journal of Conflict Resolution 37:427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Richard. 1999. Keynote Address: Threats to U.S. National Security: Proposed Partnership Initiatives toward Preventing Cyber Terrorist Attacks. DePaul Business Law Journal 12:33Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service. 2001. Cyberwarfare. June 19. http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/tech/gii/rl30735.pdf
Cornes, Richard, and Sandler, Todd. 1996. The Theory of Externalities, Public Goods and Club Goods. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demsetz, Harold. 1967. Toward a Theory of Property Rights. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 57:347Google Scholar
Downs, George, Rocke, David, and Siverson, Randolph. 1985. Arms Races and Cooperation. World Politics 38:118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easterbrook, Frank H. 1996. Cyberspace and the Law of the Horse. University of Chicago Legal Forum 1996:207Google Scholar
Economides, Nicholas. 1996. The Economics of Networks. International Journal of Independent Organizations 14:2Google Scholar
Esty, Daniel. 1999. Toward Optimal Environmental Governance. New York University Law Review 74:1495Google Scholar
Field, B. C. 1989. The Evolution of Property Rights. Kyklos 42:319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (“FATFML”). 2003. The Forty Recommendations. June. http://www1.oecd.org/fatf/40Recs_en.htm
Fox, Merritt. 2003. Optimal Regulatory Areas for Securities Disclosure. Washington University Law Quarterly 81:1017Google Scholar
Friedberg, James J. 1991. The Convergence of Law in an Era of Political Integration: The Wood Pulp Case and the Alcoa Effects Doctrine. University of Pittsburgh Law Review 52:289Google Scholar
Froomkin, A. Michael. 1997. The Internet as a Source of Regulatory Arbitrage. In Borders in Cyberspace, ed. Kahin, B., and Nesson, C., 129. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Gannon, John C. 2001. Speech to the National Security Telecommunications and Information Systems Security Committee. April 3. http://www.odci.gov/nic/speeches_telecommunications.html
Gellman, Barton. 2002. Cyber-Attacks by Al Qaeda Feared: Terrorists at Threshold of Using Internet as Tool of Bloodshed, Experts Say. Washington Post, June 27, p. A01Google Scholar
Gilmour, Kim. 2002. Wish You Were Here? The Principality of Sealand Is a Self-Proclaimed Sovereign State in the North Sea. It's Also the Place to Host Your Site If You Want to Escape Draconian Internet Privacy Law. Internet Magazine, December 1Google Scholar
Goodman, Seymour E. 2003. Toward a Treaty-based International Regime on Cyber Crime and Terrorism. In Cyber Security: Turning National Solutions into International Cooperation, ed. Lewis, James, 65. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International StudiesGoogle Scholar
Hartman, R. S. 1982. A Note on Externalities and Placement of Property Rights: An Alternative Formulation to the Standard Pigouvian Results. International Review of Law and Economics 2:111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, David R., Susan P. Crawford, and John G. Palfrey. 2004. The Accountable Net: Peer Production of Internet Governance. Draft. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/The%20Accountable%20Net%20032504.pdf
Kaspersen, Henrik. 2003. A Gate Must Either Be Open or Shut: The Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention Model. In Cyber Security: Turning National Solutions into International Cooperation, ed. Lewis, J., 1. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International StudiesGoogle Scholar
Katyal, Neal Kumar. 2003. Digital Architecture as Crime Control. Yale Law Journal 112:2261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kende, Michael. 2000. The Digital Handshake: Connecting Internet Backbones. FCC Office of Public Policy Working Paper No. 32. http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OPP/working_papers/oppwp32.pdf
Keyser, Mike, 2003. The Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime. Journal of Transnational Law and Policy 12:287Google Scholar
Lessig, Lawrence. 1999a. Code, and Other Laws of Cyberspace. Boulder, CO: Perseus Books GroupGoogle Scholar
Lessig, Lawrence. 1999b. The Law of the Horse: What Cyberlaw Might Teach. Harvard Law Review 113:501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrill, Thomas. 1985. Trespass, Nuisance, and the Costs of Determining Property Rights. Journal of Legal Studies 14:13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, William. 1996. City of Bits. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Mueller, Markus. 2004. Who Owns the Internet? Ownership as a Legal Basis for American Control of the Internet. Working paper. http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=520682
Murray, Sarah. 2003. Monitoring Cargo Becomes a High Global Priority. Financial Times, December 3, p. 4Google Scholar
Norman, George, and Joel Trachtman. Forthcoming. The Customary International Law Game
OECD Directorate for Science and Technology. 2003. Security in Maritime Transport: Risk Factors and Economic Impact. July. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/63/13/4375896.pdf
Powell, Robert. 1991. Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relations Theory. American Political Science Review 85:1303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serabian, John A. 2000. Statement for the Record before the Joint Economic Committee on Cyber Threats and the U.S. Economy. February 23. http://www.odci.gov/cia/public_affairs/speecs/2000/cyberthreats_022300.html
Shah, Rajiv C., and Jay P. Kesan. 2003. Manipulating the Governance Characteristics of Code. Illinois Public Law Research Paper No. 03–18. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=475682
Snidal, Duncan. 1991. Relative Gains and the Pattern of International Cooperation. American Political Science Review 85:701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trachtman, Joel P. 1998. Cyberspace, Sovereignty, Jurisdiction and Modernism. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 5:561Google Scholar
Trachtman, Joel P.. 2000. Regulatory Competition and Regulatory Jurisdiction. Journal of International Economic Law 3:331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trachtman, Joel P.. 2001. Economic Analysis of Perspective Jurisdiction and Choice of Law. Virginia Journal of International Law 42:1Google Scholar
Umbeck, John. 1977. A Theory of Contract Choice and the California Gold Rush. Journal of Law and Economics 20:163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Umbeck, John. 1981. Might Makes Rights: A Theory of the Formation and Initial Distribution of Property Rights. Economic Inquiry 19:38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Department of Defense. 1999. An Assessment of International Legal Issues in Information Operations. U.S. Department of Defense, Office of General Counsel. http://downloads.securityfocus.com/library/infowar/reports/dodio.pdf
Voort, Maarten, and O'Brien, Kevin A.. 1993. Seacurity: Improving the Security of the Global Sea Container Shipping System. Leiden, Netherlands: RAND EuropeGoogle Scholar
Vatis, Michael. 2003. International Cyber-Security Cooperation: Informal Bilateral Models. In Cyber Security: Turning National Solutions into International Cooperation, ed. Lewis, J., 1. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International StudiesGoogle Scholar
Verton, Dan. 2002. Corporate America Now on Front Lines of the War on Terrorism. Computerworld, September 9Google Scholar
Weiner, Tim. 2004. U.S. Law Puts World Ports on Notice. New York Times, March 24, p. A6Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×