We feel constrained in waging cyber-war because of the fears of collateral damage:
Mark Seiden, a Silicon Valley computer security specialist who was a co-author of the National Research Council report, said, “The chances are very high that you will inevitably hit civilian targets — the worst-case scenario is taking out a hospital which is sharing a network with some other agency.”
And while such attacks are unlikely to leave smoking craters, electronic attacks on communications networks and data centers could have broader, life-threatening consequences where power grids and critical infrastructure like water treatment plants are increasingly controlled by computer networks.
Over the centuries, rules governing combat have been drawn together in customary practice as well as official legal documents, like the Geneva Conventions and the United Nations Charter. These laws govern when it is legitimate to go to war, and set rules for how any conflict may be waged.
I think you can count on the same people who will site their anti-aircraft weapons next to schools will wire up their legitimate military targets with orphanages and houses of worship to make sure that there is collateral damage in a cyber-attack.
We need to do more than just build the equivalents of cement bombs to precisely take out enemy targets on the web. We need to update the laws of war to outlaw enemies from using virtual e-shields to deter our cyber-war attacks.
They'll still do it, of course, hoping for damning press coverage of America. But we should not grant them a free pass on this tactic.
