Suchergebnisse

As the Internet becomes more and more embedded in every sector of society, more and more actors have become concerned with its character, now and in the future. The private sector actors, such as Internet Service Providers or ISPs, are motivated by profits as they shape and evolve the Internet. The public sector is driven by a range of objectives: access and uptake, competition policy, regime stability, policies with regard to controlling access to classes of content, and the like. The range of actions open to governments to shape the Internet are traditional and well-understood, including law and regulation, procurement, investment in research and development, participation in the standards process and more diffuse forms of leadership. But these actions do not directly shape the Internet. They bear on the actors that in turn have direct influence over the Internet and what happens there. Thus, as part of any conversation about the shaping of the Internet, there is a narrower question that must be answered: given the Internet as it is today, who are the actors that can exercise direct control over how it works, what options for control do they actually have, and how can they in turn be influenced? ; This material is based on work supported by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, Grant No. N00014-09-1-0597. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations therein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Naval Research.

This paper has been prepared as part of the Explorations in Cyber International Relations project being carried out at MIT, Harvard and collaborating institutions. The goal of this paper is to lay the groundwork for the exploration of a fundamental thesis of the project: that the emergence of cyberspace as a phenomenon has shifted the motivations of the various actors that play on the international stage, it has added to the "tools of engagement" that these actors use as they interact, and it has created or empowered new sorts of actors that must now be taken into account in any theory of international relations. This paper, which should at this point be seen as a working draft, incomplete and anecdotal rather than scholarly and thorough, attempts to catalog by example the range of actors and the tools they use as they interact around and in cyberspace. Through these anecdotes, I illustrate classes of actors who either have a motivation to shape cyberspace, or who seem to have undergone a shift in power (up or down) by the emergence of cyberspace, and who are responding to or exploiting this situation. Using various examples, we can start to catalog some of the means by which different actors can exercise influence in cyberspace, and as well understand the new actors that seem to have significant power to influence. At a high level, we want to explore three related questions. 1.1 • • • What are the tools of influence, both direct and indirect, and to what extent does cyberspace create distinctive behavior? Is there anything new? Are there new actors that appear as players in the space of influence—actors that a traditional state actor would not regularly expect to deal with? When influence is exercises, what actors are the preferred targets of that influence? ; This material is based on work supported by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, Grant No. N00014-09-1-0597. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations therein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Naval Research.

The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to an important but perhaps under- appreciated aspect of the Internet: the emergent idea of a global commons in the use of the Internet, in which people might transcend national boundaries to discuss, plan and organize to further matters of global import, whether environmental regulation, curbing epidemics, mitigating poverty, reducing risks of nuclear wars, promoting individual freedoms, etc. This paper attempts to construct a framework to assess what this commons might be, variations in its practices, the threats it faces, and both technological and political means of protecting or at least preserving it. ; This material is based on work supported by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, Grant No. N00014-09-1-0597. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations therein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Naval Research.

A foundational analysis of the co-evolution of the internet and international relations, examining resultant challenges for individuals, organizations, firms, and states. In our increasingly digital world, data flows define the international landscape as much as the flow of materials and people. How is cyberspace shaping international relations, and how are international relations shaping cyberspace? In this book, Nazli Choucri and David D. Clark offer a foundational analysis of the co-evolution of cyberspace (with the internet as its core) and international relations, examining resultant challenges for individuals, organizations, and states. The authors examine the pervasiveness of power and politics in the digital realm, finding that the internet is evolving much faster than the tools for regulating it. This creates a "co-evolution dilemma"--a new reality in which digital interactions have enabled weaker actors to influence or threaten stronger actors, including the traditional state powers. Choucri and Clark develop a new method for addressing control in the internet age, "control point analysis," and apply it to a variety of situations, including major actors in the international and digital realms: the United States, China, and Google. In doing so they lay the groundwork for a new international relations theory that reflects the reality in which we live--one in which the international and digital realms are inextricably linked and evolving together.

A foundational analysis of the co-evolution of the internet and international relations, examining resultant challenges for individuals, organizations, firms, and states. ; In our increasingly digital world, data flows define the international landscape as much as the flow of materials and people. How is cyberspace shaping international relations, and how are international relations shaping cyberspace? In this book, Nazli Choucri and David D. Clark offer a foundational analysis of the co-evolution of cyberspace (with the internet as its core) and international relations, examining resultant challenges for individuals, organizations, and states. The authors examine the pervasiveness of power and politics in the digital realm, finding that the internet is evolving much faster than the tools for regulating it. This creates a "co-evolution dilemma"—a new reality in which digital interactions have enabled weaker actors to influence or threaten stronger actors, including the traditional state powers. Choucri and Clark develop a new method for addressing control in the internet age, "control point analysis," and apply it to a variety of situations, including major actors in the international and digital realms: the United States, China, and Google. In doing so they lay the groundwork for a new international relations theory that reflects the reality in which we live—one in which the international and digital realms are inextricably linked and evolving together.

When Wikileaks released hundreds of thousands of Iraq War logs and diplomatic cables in 2010, a horrified US government sprang into action—but the classified information the government hoped to keep from public view quickly migrated to overseas servers, ensuring that it would likely never be suppressed. After an anti-Islamic movie trailer was posted on YouTube in 2012, the horrified Pakistani government rushed to block its nation's access to the Internet video service—and, in the process, temporarily disrupted YouTube access around the world. Toward the beginning of the Egyptian revolution, the government of Hosni Mubarak tried to quell the cyber-based aspect of the protest by turning off the Internet, but that effort did little to alter the course of the revolt. China, however, continued to block searches for the terms "Egypt" and "Arab Spring," with at least some success. Until recently, cyberspace was considered largely a matter of low politics, the term political scientists use to denote background conditions and routine decisions and processes. Over the last decade, though, cyberspace, with the Internet at its core, has clearly begun to shape the domain of high politics—that is, the national security considerations, core institutions, and decision systems that are critical to national governments. Those governments have long held a monopoly on high politics and are, in turn, trying to control the future of cyberspace, with, at best, very limited success. The field of international relations, rooted in 20th-century issues and theories, has not kept pace with the emerging significance of cyberspace; and as the empowered non-state groups and individuals of cyberspace and international politics now simultaneously shape one another, the potential collisions of law, policy, and practice have barely been identified. Before the international community can begin to minimize the negative consequences of those inevitable collisions, it needs to understand how and where cyberspace and international relations intersect and influence one another, and who controls those intersections. ; This material is based on work supported by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, Grant No. N00014-09-1-0597. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations therein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Naval Research.

Cyberspace is a fact of daily life. Until recently cyberspace was considered largely a matter of low politics – the term used to denote background conditions and routine decisions and processes. By contrast high politics is about national security, core institutions, and decision systems that are critical to the state, its interests, and its underlying values. We now see cyberspace shaping the domain of high politics, and high politics shaping the future of cyberspace. The field of international relations, rooted in 20th century issues and theories, has not kept pace with the emerging significance of cyberspace. This paper addresses what we call the co-evolution dilemma: as cyberspace and international politics now start to shape each other, we have few conceptual anchors to fully identify, let alone model, the potential collision of law, policy and practice in the cyber arena with shared norms, common practices, and modes of interactions in international relations that have evolved over time. At a minimum, we need to develop a map of the joint domain of cyberspace and international relations. Our purpose here is to (1) develop an alignment strategy to connect the Internet, the core of cyberspace, and international relations (2) introduce the control point analysis, a method we have developed to explicate dynamics among cyber-actors, in terms of their relative power and influence, and (3) highlight critical co-evolution parameters embedded in the fabric of world politics. ; This material is based on work supported by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, Grant No. N00014-09-1-0597. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations therein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Naval Research.

As a result of increasing spam, DDoS attacks, cybercrime, and data exfiltration from corporate and government sites, there have been multiple calls for an Internet architecture that enables better network attribution at the packet layer. The intent is for a mechanism that links a packet to some packet level personally identifiable information (PLPII). But cyberattacks and cyberexploitations are more different than they are the same. One result of these distinctions is that packet-level attribution is neither as useful nor as necessary as it would appear. In this paper we discuss why network-level personal attribution is of limited forensic value. We analyze the different types of Internet-based attacks, and observe the role that currently available alternatives to attribution already play in deterrence and prosecution. We focus on the particular character of multi-stage network attacks, in which machine A penetrates and "takes over" machine B, which then does the same to machine C, etc. We consider how these types of attacks might be traced, and observe that any technical contribution can only be contemplated in the larger regulatory context of various legal jurisdictions. Finally we examine the costs of PLPII mechanisms. ; This material is based on work supported by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, Grant No. N00014-09-1-0597. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations therein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Naval Research.