Plea of Necessity: Legal Key to Protection against Unattributable Cyber Operations

Jakub Spáčil
{"title":"Plea of Necessity: Legal Key to Protection against Unattributable Cyber Operations","authors":"Jakub Spáčil","doi":"10.5817/mujlt2022-2-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cyber operations represent one of the main security threats today. The number of cyber operations attacking critical infrastructure is increasing year by year and states are looking for means to defend against this threat. However, the origin of hostile cyber operations is often located in the territory of another state, and attacked states must therefore grapple with the question of international law in their search for an effective defence mechanism. If states wish to defend themselves actively, the sovereignty of another state may be infringed, and such an infringement must be justified by an instrument of international law. These instruments of international law are retorsion, countermeasures, self-defence and plea of necessity. Application of plea of necessity, unlike the other alternatives mentioned, is not premised on the attributability of the cyber operation to the state, and it is precisely the attribution of cyber operation that poses one of the main problems of taking legal defensive measures. The article is divided into two parts. The first part is devoted to the relationship between retorsion, countermeasures, self-defence and plea of necessity. The second part discusses the conditions for the application of plea of necessity in the cyber context. The text takes into account the available state practice, in particular the national positions on the application of plea of necessity in the cyber context published in the last three years.","PeriodicalId":38294,"journal":{"name":"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/mujlt2022-2-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cyber operations represent one of the main security threats today. The number of cyber operations attacking critical infrastructure is increasing year by year and states are looking for means to defend against this threat. However, the origin of hostile cyber operations is often located in the territory of another state, and attacked states must therefore grapple with the question of international law in their search for an effective defence mechanism. If states wish to defend themselves actively, the sovereignty of another state may be infringed, and such an infringement must be justified by an instrument of international law. These instruments of international law are retorsion, countermeasures, self-defence and plea of necessity. Application of plea of necessity, unlike the other alternatives mentioned, is not premised on the attributability of the cyber operation to the state, and it is precisely the attribution of cyber operation that poses one of the main problems of taking legal defensive measures. The article is divided into two parts. The first part is devoted to the relationship between retorsion, countermeasures, self-defence and plea of necessity. The second part discusses the conditions for the application of plea of necessity in the cyber context. The text takes into account the available state practice, in particular the national positions on the application of plea of necessity in the cyber context published in the last three years.
必要性抗辩:防范不可归因网络操作的法律关键
网络行动是当今主要的安全威胁之一。攻击关键基础设施的网络行动数量逐年增加,各国都在寻找防御这种威胁的手段。然而,敌对网络行动的起源往往位于另一个国家的领土上,因此,受攻击的国家在寻求有效的防御机制时必须努力解决国际法问题。如果一个国家希望积极保护自己,那么另一个国家的主权就可能受到侵犯,而这种侵犯必须得到国际法文书的证明。这些国际法文书是反击、反措施、自卫和必要抗辩。与上述两种抗辩方式不同的是,必要抗辩的适用并不以网络行为的国家归属为前提,而网络行为的国家归属正是构成采取法律防卫措施的主要问题之一。本文分为两部分。第一部分论述了反击、反制、自卫与正当防卫的关系。第二部分论述了网络环境下必要抗辩适用的条件。案文考虑了现有的国家实践,特别是过去三年公布的关于在网络环境下适用必要性抗辩的国家立场。
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
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
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