Attacking Data: Moving beyond the Interpretative Quagmire of the ‘Data as an Object’ Debate

Q2 Social Sciences
Marc Schack, Katrine Lund-Hansen
{"title":"Attacking Data: Moving beyond the Interpretative Quagmire of the ‘Data as an Object’ Debate","authors":"Marc Schack, Katrine Lund-Hansen","doi":"10.1163/15718107-92030004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A key contemporary challenge for international lawyers is to determine how international humanitarian law ( ihl ) applies to cyber operations. This involves determining how ihl language – devised for the physical world – can be translated into usable concepts for the digital age. Often, this is done largely by balancing the ‘ordinary meaning’ of specific ihl concepts against the ‘object and purpose’ of ihl treaties. This, at least, has been the case in the debate on whether the concept of ‘objects’ include or exclude (digital) data. Contributors to this debate often emphasise this balancing act, but also seem guided by what they consider acceptable outcomes. Specifically, they argue that what is legal in the analogue, physical world should not be rendered illegal through digitisation and vice versa. This article argues that this approach is unhelpful as it leads to conflicting results. Instead, we argue that the addition of a contextual analysis could help move the debate forward.","PeriodicalId":34997,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of International Law","volume":"123 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718107-92030004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract A key contemporary challenge for international lawyers is to determine how international humanitarian law ( ihl ) applies to cyber operations. This involves determining how ihl language – devised for the physical world – can be translated into usable concepts for the digital age. Often, this is done largely by balancing the ‘ordinary meaning’ of specific ihl concepts against the ‘object and purpose’ of ihl treaties. This, at least, has been the case in the debate on whether the concept of ‘objects’ include or exclude (digital) data. Contributors to this debate often emphasise this balancing act, but also seem guided by what they consider acceptable outcomes. Specifically, they argue that what is legal in the analogue, physical world should not be rendered illegal through digitisation and vice versa. This article argues that this approach is unhelpful as it leads to conflicting results. Instead, we argue that the addition of a contextual analysis could help move the debate forward.
攻击数据:超越“数据作为对象”辩论的解释性泥潭
当代国际律师面临的一个关键挑战是确定国际人道法(ihl)如何适用于网络行动。这包括确定如何将为物理世界设计的语言转化为数字时代可用的概念。通常,这主要是通过平衡具体国际人道法概念的“普通含义”与国际人道法条约的“目标和目的”来实现的。至少,在关于“对象”的概念是否包括或排除(数字)数据的辩论中,情况就是如此。这场辩论的参与者经常强调这种平衡行为,但似乎也受到他们认为可接受的结果的指导。具体来说,他们认为,在模拟物理世界中合法的东西不应该通过数字化而变得非法,反之亦然。本文认为,这种方法是无益的,因为它会导致相互矛盾的结果。相反,我们认为增加上下文分析有助于推动辩论向前发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Established in 1930, the Nordic Journal of International Law has remained the principal forum in the Nordic countries for the scholarly exchange on legal developments in the international and European domains. Combining broad thematic coverage with rigorous quality demands, it aims to present current practice and its theoretical reflection within the different branches of international law.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信