Cyber Security and International Law

Introduction

The use of law and diplomacy can resolve the Cyber Security conflicts between sovereign states, within countries and amongst private actors through the use of economic reasoning and Christian Values. The use of deterrents, countermeasures and defenses can alleviate the threat from private and state actors. Inter alia, the spread of Christian Values will assist in the effort to do good for the world instead of pursuing evil through the use of cyber channels. “So in everything, do unto others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the law and the prophets”[1]

With the world becoming increasingly connected through the internet and every person having a personal internet device, it is increasingly likely that Cyber Attacks will occur. Both between sovereign countries and among private actors. “Plus, China and Russia are trying to take out our internet every day. People really like the internet. They’re always checking it” -Steve Carell as General Mark R. Naird[2]

Facts and Legal Issues

  1. Cyber attacks

Cyber warfare presents an increasingly new threat on the world stage. Today, unlike 20 or 30 years ago, an attacker can act from a distance on the other side of the world without ever having to be subject to the laws or reach of the target nation.[3] Therefore, the implementation of international law on the matter is vital to peace and basic human dignity.

When addressing a Cyber-attack several considerations must be noted. “The effects of a cyber-attack can range from a simple inconvenience (such as a DDoS attack that disrupts web traffic temporarily), to physical destruction (such as changing the commands to an electrical power generator causing it to explode), and even to death (such as disrupting the emergency lines to first responders so that calls cannot be made to police or ambulance services). But treating all forms of cyber-attack as a use of force would require an implausibly broad reading of Article 2 (4) that includes non-physical damage.”[4] However, allowing the eroding of the moral fabric of society and the salacious perpetuations of a few will only serve to detriment the people. Though it may be implausible to read Article 2(4) in an expansive manner, to ignore some malfeasance is to invite the horrific.

Another source of cyber weakness in the system is the rise in “crypto-currency.” Crypto-currency is a type of internet or computer based money. Currently, there is a large amount of assets tied up in crypto currency. Crypto Currency has been linked to money laundering which does have an effect on where money gets invested.[5] Where money gets invested directly effects what agendas are affected or supported by world powers. The dangers with Crypto Currency is that in the blink of an eye, if a hacker is able, they can wipe out Billions in electronic assets. At least one of these crypto currencies has been hacked. Major Cyber security breaches have occurred in relation to these crypto currencies or block chain money. These security breaches have affected billions in assets. A major issue with crypto currency however, is that it is often used to launder money from ill gotten gains or activities that are otherwise illegal.

Another form of cyber attack is one that is perhaps more terrifying for a lot of people and that’s a cyber attack on an airplane in the sky while flying. Today, most passenger jets are what’s known as “fly by wire.” Fly by wire is when an autopilot or electronic devices control the controls of an airplane. Even small general aviation airplanes have rudimentary fly by wire devices. These systems become much more complex on the newer larger jet airliners. The more complex a system is the more potential points of attack it probably possesses. For example, today these large airliners are often connected via data uplink to a satellite or ground facility.

Though there have not been any confirmed cyber attacks on a large jet liner, there has been speculation. Iran has claimed that they U.S. brought down a passenger jet using hacking. There was significant speculation that the recent 747 Max crashes occurred because of hacking. The claim was that a hacker manipulated the control surfaces of the elevator to cause the crash, Boeing and the NTSB later dispelled this assertion claiming that the crashes happened because a system was not disengaged. They added a regiment of training to the type rating after these crashes. This is a scary notion that a person on the other side of the world could crash a jet liner using a computer. Most of the equipment used in aviation, at least in the U.S., is a high standard and quality. Any potential hacker of an airline would really have to know exactly what they were doing.

There have also been claims that certain motor vehicles have been hacked. That the driverless cars and autonomous vehicles have weaknesses that hackers could exploit. Several studies at major Universities have suggested that these vehicles can be accessed by bad actors. These studies showed that the vehicles autonomous modes could be manipulated to cause them to crash into objects potentially harming the occupants.

Perhaps one of the scariest things about these potential dubious acts is that a hacker could get away with it. It is not easy to trace someone and their computer, especially someone that knows how to hide what they are doing. Cyber Security is constantly changing with technology and what is done today may be totally different from what is done tomorrow. In order for bad actors to be brought to justice there needs to be experts that know how to find this sort of activity. Essentially, it needs to better for a bad actor’s life to do good instead of evil. Power has a way of inherently manipulating individual thought processes and Cyber Security is no different.

Finally, Cyber Security related to corporate espionage is also of concern. Corporations foreign international stealing each other’s ideas and hoping for the later to fail. China steals American corporate information constantly. They will gather information from a corporations systems then, a few short months later, you’ll see the same product on Chinese shelves but the product made by a different company. Corporate Cyber espionage has significant economic effects. That can severely affect a business. Fortunately, in the U.S. we do not allow violations of Intellectual property law so products made as a violation of cyber security are not supposed to be allowed on American shelves for sale. This is increasingly difficult to enforce though.

  1. International law applicable to cyber warfare

The International Law applicable to cyberwarfare is a nations right of self-defense under the United Nations Charter, by Article 51.[6] This acts as a deterrent to bad state and private actors internationally. Self-defense is a foundational principle in legal doctrine. The idea that a party should have to wait until a nefarious party act upon them before they may act. These leaves open quite a bit to question. With China and Russia constantly collecting information on American citizens, this seems like the cold war all over again only on a different level. Information has always been valuable, but today the amount of information and its detail are highly intrusive. The U.S. should not be required to wait until China or Russia engage in bad action when we know that they are preparing for bad action. This leaves the American Citizen vulnerable. And, that should not be the specter.

A limitation on the law of self-defense is “necessity” and “proportionality.” Through necessity a sovereign state is supposed to attempt peaceful negotiations first before reacting with a counterattack. Though this is what humanity should aspire to, we must take away the bad actors ability to inflict future attacks. Otherwise, we could just be seen as appeasing Hitler.[7] When a bad actor does something through cyber warfare, the ability of that actor to do said harm must be taken away. Necessity would suggest that we wait until a bad actor takes down the power gird until be blow up their computers. This is unwise because civilian deaths could quickly surmount in the U.S. if the power grid goes down. Just like all those elderly people that passed away in Florida nursing homes when a hurricane came through and knocked out the power. What should be done is what the U.S. probably does not do enough of, which is gaming the system. Conducting fake attacks on our own system in order to find where the wholes are and fix them.

Through proportionality, a state is supposed to limit the counterattack to defeat the ongoing attack. The current international law on proportionality does not fully address the issue of future attacks. If a future attack is emanate or there is nothing deterring a future attack then it would be proportionally appropriate to take the ability of any future attack away from a deviant state. Similar to taking Saddam Hussein’s ability to produce weapons of mass destruction away from him.[8] Whether they actually existed in the first place, appears to be debatable.[9]

Proportionality is up for deliberation on what is considered fair. Because fairness is the cornerstone of law, it must be weighed whenever the international community or individual state actors seek to effect proportionality. Without the foundational idea of fairness within the law, law itself would become unhinged, through the balance of fairness the law has created a civilized society. The problem with proportionality is that it leaves the bad actor able to fight again another day. Kind of like what the United States and the international community did with Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War. The United States only booted Saddam from his unlawful occupation of Kuwait and did not go all the way to Baghdad to remove him from power. Low and behold the U.S. had to go back to the gulf a short decade later to remove Saddam under the alleged WMD scandal.

  1. The United States

The United States has identified Russia, China, Iran and North Korea as an ongoing threat to U.S. cybersecurity.[10] The foregoing nations have sought to affect critical infrastructure, sew discord among American Citizens and even directly interfere with the U.S.’s electoral process. These governments have a particular kind of agenda. For example, Facebook in order to operate in China, ran ads on their platform denying the genocide of an entire race of people in Asia.[11] Which is still ongoing.

In a speech by Nobel Peace Prize winning U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 2006 regarding Human Rights, “If we are serious about human deprivation, we must also demonstrate that we are serious about human dignity, and vice versa.”[12]  Though Annan was speaking on extreme poverty, This very much applies to those in our Federal, State and some local well-funded agency’s that act with impunity while violating the human right to privacy of the United States Citizen. Many large corporations are acting with similar impunity.[13] The United States government and many large corporations could quickly be brought before the International Criminal Court, if the U.N. started pursuing such injustice and if the United States agreed to the Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. Basically, what the United States Government is saying to the rest of the world is that they would seek to pursue evil rather than good. That even though there is a high level of influence the U.S. has within the U.N. (i.e. Permanent Member of the Security Council, U.N. Headquarters in the U.S., and general world dominance) it is better to forgo jurisdiction of the ICC and adhering to the Human Right to Privacy through cybersecurity then to do evil upon its own citizens. “With great power, comes great responsibility.”-Uncle Ben[14]

The U.S. Federal Government, and in which case has a trickledown effect to state and local governments won’t even adhere to the Geneva Convention on Torture.[15] John Hutson, Judge Advocate General for the United States Navy from 1997-2000, “Adherence to the Geneva Convention is more important to us (The U.S.) than to any other nation.” This applies to all Human Rights in the United Nations Charter. “...Justice has often bolstered lasting peace, by de-legitimizing and driving underground those individuals who pose the gravest threat to it. That is why there should never be amnesty for…. massive violations of human rights.”[16] Without holding those in the United States government accountable for their actions, it will only create an environment for them to utilize their power in pursuance of Bollea v. Gawker type of deviance.[17]

  1. The effects of a cyber attack on an individual level

Online psychological manipulation on an individual level can subject a countries citizens to a distortion of reality.[18] The general publics denial or lack of understanding of which will most likely lead to the ideocracy of civilization and foundational malevolence. Human’s quite often believe what is shown to them, not because of objective truth, but because of incessant truth. What is in their “feed,” they see on the internet, and the media reports. In other words, a truth that is not really a truth it is merely repeated repeatedly and therefore becomes accepted as truth for only that reason. This has exploited the inability of a significant number of individuals in conjunction with the collective, to think for themselves. A manipulation that has been perpetuated since the invention of the written word.

A similar form of cyber malfeasance among private actors in the United States, is isolation of  smart phones of individuals or utilizing geolocation technology to determine particular jurors. Then manipulating what they see on their phones to appear in a way to tortiously sway a jury. This is in every essence, jury tampering.[19]

Furthermore, and perhaps an even sinister cyber attack on an individual is spousal, partner or former partner abuse.[20] Essentially, a the cellphone is a constant listening device and those that do not seek to do the right thing are harassing others and most certainly breaking United States federal law. Even if a state has not passed legislation on a particular matter, federal law quite often applies. For example, the sweeping but far to often unenforced Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) applies to those whom seek to use computers, including your smart phone or other electronic device for purposes other then intended, abuse or deviance.[21]

On an international level, the Chinese based “TikTok” smart phone application has come under significant scrutiny lately. The application is immensely popular. The addictive nature of the application is uncanny. It fills the heads of its user with dopamine inducing short video clip after short video clip. TikTok is the result of a group of computer engineers getting together and attempting to make the most addicting application. It is very easy to get lost down a rabbit whole of TikTok videos. However, recent review of what the application tracks and the data it collects has resulted critical review of the application. The application basically keeps track of every single button you push on your cellphone and sends it to Chinese intelligence agencies. Similar to crack cocaine, we cannot allow the American people to destroy themselves and the country by doing this.

  1. Human Rights Law

On the international level, we see significant United Nations Resolutions occurring regarding the Human Right to Privacy.[22] Though there will always be rouge states, organizations, agencies and individuals. United Nations Resolution 68/167 The right to Privacy in the Digital Age, provides in part:

            “Reaffirming the human right to privacy, according to which no one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, and the right to protection of the law against such interference, and recognizing that the exercise of the right to privacy is important for the realization of the right to freedom of expression and to hold opinions without interference, and is one of the foundations of a democratic society, Stressing the importance of the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information, including the fundamental importance of access to information and democratic participation”[23]

Through resolutions of this nature and the worlds superpowers recognition and actual implementations will we as a world society see a better tomorrow. Through undercover and clandestine FISA courts will we see a fundamental downfall of civilization as we know it. FISA courts are essentially the government’s way of being a “peeping tom” and getting away with it. Anyone else being a “peeping tom” gets a sex offenders charge.

Current International Law regulating Cyber Security centers around International Human Rights Law. The misuse of information by various conflicting groups has created a disinformation humanitarian crisis, through avenues such as hate speech, population manipulation and radicalization.[24] There have even been reports that bad actors can use the internet, usually through social media, to influence who interacts with who. In other words, a bad actor could use social media to determine a person stance on various issues use that to create a meeting with another person who has completely opposite views. Wherein theses two parties would usually not interact with each other or generally come into contact, they could be manipulated to be at the same place, at the same time and under other conditions that could lead to disastrous effects. They can utilize the knowledge of people’s patterns to and activities. Most people are in a routine set or pattern of movement throughout the day. This is probably what the mass collection of personal data China is engaging in is really doing. These sorts of interactions can be used to sway the course of peoples lives. Or, in a bad state actors hope of increasing the likely hood of a negative interaction that may sway an election.

In counties worldwide, the right to privacy varies greatly. For example, in China there is zero right to privacy. They have implemented a facial recognition system that is extreme. If you walk across the street in China when you do not have a green light to do so you get a ticket in the mail. This is starting to show itself in the United States with redlight camera’s. These redlight cameras are probably not constitutional but that has not been fully determined and most localities do not like them for that reason. I am very thankful I am not a Chinese citizen or a person living in China or Russia. At least in the U.S. if the authorities cross a particular line of indecency, I have a right to ask a random group of people whether the government owes me money or a remedy. Its certainly not easy to get to a civil jury but that relief is there. Even if it costs years of your life.

On the other side of privacy is Greece, it ranks top in the world on privacy which is interesting when we think about the birthplace of democracy. The Greeks value their privacy and do not want the local authorities impeding on that basic human right. Maybe after a few millennia of being a democracy, like Greece, the U.S. will come to its senses. Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life.”[25]

How Law and Diplomacy can be used as a resolution

  1. Diplomacy in Cyber Security

In 2015 leaders of the G20 met to assert a charter on Cyber security. This charter not only applies to state but also non-state actors in the cyber world. In 2018, the United Nations through an open-ended working group adopted several resolutions to address international law concerning cyber security.[26]

Through international diplomacy the world community can achieve proactive cyber security resolutions. Diplomacy can help distinguish what is important to different countries. In some countries in Europe, there are what is called “right to be forgotten” laws. These laws restrict companies like google from keeping certain embarrassing information about particular people on the internet indefinitely. If information can be left up indefinitely, this can affect future employment and so forth.

The U.S. and other superpowers are primarily concerned with matters like holding hospital information hostage or attacks on critical infrastructure. Over the past decade there has been several attacks on hospitals and major healthcare providers. What a bad actor will do is access a providers servers or data centers and make it so the usual doctor or nurse cannot access it until a ransom is paid. This can have catastrophic effects on the trust most of society places on medical providers surrounding  doctor-patient confidentiality.

In any event, diplomacy can help solve these issues if everyone in the international community could get on the same page. Through diplomatic intercourse, the world could come to an international community understanding that certain matters are in congruent with Christian values and some things are not. This would “take the wind out of the sails” of those who would seek to hack servers and systems for wrongdoing. Because quite a few of these ransom ware circumstance originate from countries on the other side of the world where domestic law cannot reach. Not without international agreement.

  1. The United States in relation to the rest of the world

The United States has significant work to do as its Constitution and legislation does not adhere to the standard set on the international stage regarding the human right to privacy.[27] Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from 1948 provides for a Human Right to Privacy.[28] With an absolute disrespect to the human rights of its own citizens in the cyber security realm, the United States is most certainly lacking. “We [the U.S. government] like the fact that it is a Wild West because it lets us do more attack and exploitation."Jason Healey[29] That is a derelict approach to a human right.

When contemplating this particular kind of Human Rights violation, one is reminded of “Cold War-ear U.S. policymakers such as George Kennan and Henry Kissinger, whom insist that certain rules can and should be broken when it is in a state’s interest to do so.”[30] This notion finds little logic when dealing with a state’s own citizens pertaining to the Human Right to Privacy or in most circumstances absent a battlefield situation. And, for the most part seems akin to what the British were doing to the American Colonist immediately before the declaration of independence. Two hundred years ago they had eyes and ears in all of the colonists’ homes by forcing the colonist to quarter British soldiers, today there’s a microphone and camera in every home. Essentially, tyranny just got more efficient. “We are condemned to repeat our mistakes if we have not learned the lessons of the past.”[31]

The idea that the American people now have to worry about undressing in front of an electronic device for fear that Uncle Sam or Deputy Rosco is eating a donut watching and getting a taxpayer paycheck to do is pathetic and undignified. This is similar to the harassment undertaken by the FBI labeling Martin Luther King, Jr. a threat to national security. The same thing was done to another human rights activist, Cesar Chavez. Even Susan B. Anthony was harassed by authorities when she sought to point out the injustice of their hypocrisy. If an individual does not believe those in power are doing the right thing, law enforcement will look for a way they can break U.S. Constitutional rights of that person and attempt to maintain the status quo. This is most unfortunate, because what those in power are asserting is that positive change should be stifled. “On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.”[32]

In recent history, the Obama administration extended INTERPOL protections under the privileges and immunities act.[33] This is quite disturbing as it allows an international law enforcement agency to operate on U.S. soil without being subject to U.S. courts jurisdiction. Essentially, INTERPOL can conduct law enforcement operations with no oversight. INTERPOL’s record keeping and operators are immune from any wrong doing. In The U.S., though severely under enforced, Law Enforcement agencies are at a minimum subject to the U.S. Constitution. But, that will not be the case for INTERPOL.

  1. Systemic Implications of Cyber Security

Utilizing the United Nations as an avenue for diplomatic negotiations will be the most productive route to a successful resolution. The economic impact of continuing a continuous cyber war will likely produce $9 to $22 trillion dollars of waste by 2022.[34] This is an astronomical number and more then quite a few small countries gross domestic product. Crypto Currency cyber hacking has been said to cost upwards of 2.8 billion.

There is essentially a balance of what is wasteful. Similar to the way the U.S. transportation system operates. How much is the damage worth compared to the cost of preventing it. Quite often, our roadways do not become safer like have certain signs placed or guard rails installed on streets until someone is hurt. And, it’s because it costs money to prevent the damage or injury in the first place. This is highly analogues to most things that humanity does, and Cybersecurity is not different. Basically, those that can fix or prevent cyber breaches most likely will not do so until the time comes that the cost of ignoring a problem area becomes more expensive than not ignoring it.

For example, Facebook has come under significant scrutiny in recent history. The founder of Facebook was hauled before Congress to provide information. After the hearing, Facebook was directed to better protect its users information. Facebook was fully well and content with allowing user information to go willy nilly to anyone who could infringe on an individuals account. Only until congress chastised its CEO did the company begin to protect its users and even now, it still has a long way to go.

Current International Negotiations

  1. Currently

International law surrounding Cyber Security is still developing. The specifics of what the international community finds acceptable and unacceptable is highly ambiguous. The United States implementation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act should be used as a basis for the International law moving forward. Though the CFAA would most likely find a dilution if the International Community ever took it into consideration.

The CFAA is a direct application of what should be the international norm. Though it is not even enforced in the U.S. mainly because that would cause a significant use of resources to enforce and those that would be enforcing it would also probably be held liable to it for breaking the law for their own actions. This is because that the CFAA essentially says you cannot use an electronic device in a way that was not intended. This is super expansive and can quickly be tailored to whatever political power is in place at the time of enforcement.

When a law can be subjectively applied and not objectively enforced, it erodes its authority in general. Where someone might say that it is ok to use the computer to look up inappropriate photos, the producer of the computer would most likely say that it was not an intended use for the electronic device. This could leave a significant number of people open to liability for violating the CFAA. What should be the goal is for people seek Christian Values. Few if any producers of electronic devices intended from their devices to be used for abuse, harassment or warfare.

The Chinese are certainly an exception to that this rule. The Chinese company Huawei was surreptitiously creating an access point for the Chinese military to impede the civil liberties of the American Citizen. Huawei is a cell phone and computer manufacture in China. Their products are or were highly popular in America. Huawei was building their cellphones and electronic devices with a “backdoor” in their programing or hardware so that Chinese officials could access the phones remotely, whenever they wanted to.

This is equivalent to secretly bugging ever electronic device they produced, which was millions of units. Huawei did this and then shipped their products across the ocean for the American consumer to unwittingly have in their home. This is most certain an act in preparation for war. Spying is spying anyway you look at it. The Chinese have shown time and time again that they are collecting massive amounts of data on every American citizen. The only purpose of this is to implement control. There really is not any other reason other then they are preparing for some sort of bad action.

The Russians are essentially doing the same thing just in a different way. During the Obama administration, President Obama labeled several Russian foreigners “persona non grata,” and gave them a short amount of time to leave the country. These Russian nationals who were in the United States for what they presented as diplomatic purposes, they were actually in the U.S. for devious purposes. They were here to affect cyber security in the United States or insecurity we should say. The Obama Administration must be commended along with the State Department for swiftly discharging these individuals from the country. The security of the United States infrastructure, sovereignty and daily life of its citizens must not be infringed upon.

The Russians that Obama discharged “persona non grata” influenced, through the use of social media and the internet, the United States 2016 electoral process. This is a scary assertion. That a foreign power would seek to sway the minds of American Citizens electing leaders. Who the American people elect often has a direct effect on when the U.S. goes to war. What international financial deals are made and just about everything in our daily life. If a foreign power is seeking to influences elections through the use of cyber war, this can have systemic effects on the development of a country.

The United Nations is attempting to address extraterritorial surveillance and internet defamation.[35] The United Nations attempts to address the issue have fallen short of the action needed. The largest problem is a few select bad state actors exploiting wholes in the system that are not apparent until they are exploited. The U.N. condemn extraterritorial surveillance, essentially what China and Russia are doing constantly. Numerous resolutions have been passed but it only changes the guise of these countries’ activities not the aim.

  1. Looking forward

With the Russia-Ukrainian war raging onward, the aspect of cyberwarfare has come to the forefront of international discussion. Russia and the west are continually engaged in cyber warfare. The cost of which is tolling daily. With the increase in the cost of Cyber Security there comes a diversion of assets that could be used for more humanitarian agendas. Combating a cyber war like all war is expensive in both human life and monetary assets.

China is also a significant threat to the peace and security of the United States. The with the recent provocations and political posturing of the current politicians in power in the U.S. conflict appears to be closer then ever before. Recently, U.S. political leaders have been traveling to Taiwan, a disputed island in the South China Sea.

China has asserted before that as long as the rest of the world stays out of the issues Taiwan and China have, no conflict would ensue. However, that seems to have changed. Political leaders in the last few months have been making several trips to Taiwan Island in what appears to be an effort to “poke the bear.” China has responded with cyber-attacks. Chinese hackers were even hacking billboards in Taiwan spewing propaganda about the U.S. politicians visit. China certainly sees these visits as a threat to their security. But in all reality, if Kim Jung Un visited Cuba, the U.S. would not be excited about it.

Conclusion

International Law has a long way to go on the issue of Cyber Security. Bad actors continually exploit loopholes and governments dissociative indifference to their own citizens human rights must be addressed. If the international community could follow the lead of the Greeks on the human right to privacy and implement international agreements on state sponsored cyber attacks we would see a much better future. There will always be bad private actors, that is just part of humanity, there will always be outliers of ridiculousness. Criminals will only go away when we are able to lead them off at the pass or stop them before they even get started. Ransome ware is something that will be extremely difficult to fully destroy.

However, bad state actors are something that we can alleviate through diplomacy. The precedent has already been set, through example international agreements like the nuclear non-proliferation agreement. If everyone could get on the same page and stop the cycle of attributing assets to an endless cyber war then assets could be designated elsewhere, like space-x.

Humanity’s assertion of Christian Values and international diplomacy will see a future that is not so ripe with economic waste and deprivation of human dignity related to cyber security. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”[36] “The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the founders fought.”[37] -U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts

[1] Matthew 7:12 (King James)

[2] Karen Guttieri, Accelerate Change or Lose The Information War, 1 J. Stra. Air. Space 92 (2022)

[3] Joseph N. Madubuike-Ekwe, J. N. (2021) Cyberattack and the Use of Force in International Law. Beijing Law Review, 12, 631-649.

[4] Id. at 637

[5] Michael P. Scharf & Paul R. Williams, The Law of International Organizations 1120 (2013

[6] Id. at 635

[7] Norrin M. Ripsman and Jack S. Levy, Wishful Thinking or Buying Time?, International Security Vol. 33, No. 2 (Fall, 2008) pp. 148-181

[8] Ronald Higgins, Weapons of Mass Destruction: Rhetoric and Realities, Connections Vol. 2, No. 1 (March 2003) pp. 59-68

[9] Gregg Zoroya, Whatever happened to Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction? Ask USA Today, February 14, 2019

[10] Id. at 97

[11] Id.

[12] Michael P. Scharf & Paul R. Williams, The Law of International Organizations 334 (2013)

[13] Heidi Boghosian, The Business of Surveillance, Human Rights Vol. 39, No. 3, PRIVACY Who Is Watching? (March 2013), pp. 2-5, 23 (5 pages)

[14] Stan Lee, Spider-Man (2002)

[15] Supra note 8 at 314

[16] Supra note 8 at 335

[17] Bollea v. Gawker Media, LLC, Case No. 8:12-cv-02348-T-27TBM (M.D. Fla. Nov. 13, 2012)

[18] Id. at 96

[19] Hon. Amy J. St. Eve & Michael A. Zuckerman, Ensuring An Impartial Jury, 11 Duke L. Tech R. 12 (2012)

[20] William Turton, Abusive partners are now tracking their spouses with apps made to watch their kids, Vice News, September 16, 2018, https://www.vice.com/en/article/ev7n44/abusive-partners-are-now-tracking-their-spouses-with-apps-made-to-watch-their-kids

[21] Molly Eichten, Survey of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act Cases, The Business Lawyer Vol. 67, No. 1 (November 2011)

[22] GANGULY, SUMIT. United Nations Resolution on the Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, Snowden Reader, Indiana University Press, 2015, pp. 313–16. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt16gh840.47. Accessed 13 Aug. 2022.

[23] Id. at 314

[24] Scott J. Shackelford, Inside the Drive for Cyber Peace: Unpacking Implications for Practitioners and Policymakers, 21 U.C. Davis Bus. L.J. 285, (Spring, 2021)

[25] Proverbs 4:23 (King James)

[26] Id. at 308

[27] Id. at 313

[28] Supra note 8, at 63

[29] Id. at 295

[30] Ngaire Woods, What the Mighty Miss, The Blind Spots of Power, (July/August 2022) https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/2022-06-21/what-mighty-miss

[31] Supra Note 11 at 947

[32] Matthew 7:22-23 (King James)

[33] Supra note 11 at 191

[34] Supra note 11, at 287.

[35] Anupam Chander & Molly Land, Introductory Note to United Nations General Assembly Resolution on the Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, Int. Legal. Materials, Vol. 53, No. 4 (2014) pp. 727-731

[36] Galatians 3:28 (King James)

[37] Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373, 134 S. Ct. 2473, 189 L. Ed. 2d 430, 2014

Human Rights Lawyer

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accident Lawyer. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a Youtube InstagramFacebookTwitterLinkedInTumblrBloggerRedditYelpAvvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram