Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article examines the redirection of incoming missiles when employed by defending forces to whom obligations to take precautions against the effects of attacks apply. The analysis proceeds in four steps. In the first step, the possibility of redirection is examined from an empirical standpoint. Step two defines the contours of the obligation to take precautions against the effects of attacks. Step three considers one variant of redirection, where a missile is redirected back towards the adversary. It is argued that such acts of redirection would fulfil the definition of attack under the law of armed conflict, and that prima facie conflicts of obligations could be avoided through interpretation of the feasibility standard embedded in the obligation to take precautions against the effects of attacks. Finally, step four analyzes acts of redirection against persons under the control of the redirecting State. Analyzing this scenario calls for an inquiry into the relationship between the relevant obligations under international humanitarian law and human rights law.

Abstract
In late 2020, news surfaced about one of the most extensive attacks on an information technology (IT) supply chain to date. Hackers exploited a vulnerability in the update system of Orion, a network-monitoring and management software developed by the company SolarWinds. Malicious code embedded in Orion updates created a backdoor into the systems used by numerous private and public entities. This backdoor was then used to insert additional malware into affected systems – in particular, spyware to exfiltrate confidential or sensitive data. Considering both the importance of preserving the integrity of IT supply chains and the diverse risks of harm that attacks such as the SolarWinds hack give rise to, this article examines this cyber operation according to the relevant rules of international law – notably those on sovereignty, non-intervention, general due diligence duties and international human rights law. It concludes that the operation may have been illegal on multiple fronts.