1. Cyber Aggression and Conflict
Brandon Valeriano
Cardiff University

2. Introduction
Cyber operations, cyber crime, and other forms of cyber activities directed by one state against another are now considered part of the normal relations range of combat and conflict.
New Domain or layers?
We need to understand the international relations context of cyber actions to understand the dynamics.
Make considered policy judgments based on evidence

3. Introduction
Rather than suggesting that the nature of combat has changed, we are interested in examining if, how, and why it has changed. The shift towards the knowable rather than “unknown knowns” of the cyber domain is important in scholarly discourse and could perhaps lead to a more proportional means of defense for governments involved in the cyber battlefield
Scope: Macro
Impact: Consequences
Norms and Taboos: Critical Dimensions

4. 2. We Need Cyber Theories and Data
Inductive
Cyber Restraint
the reproducibility of the tactic, cyber weapons are not one shot weapons, they can be replicated thus they are dangerous in ways that conventional weapons are not
cyber weapons are complex
the chances of collateral damage (and thus blame) are high, cyber weapons are not surgical
diffusion of the conflict, the probability is high if a cyber weapons is used, others will be effected and engage either through alliances or friendship bonds
blowback, cyber weapons if used to great effect will demand repercussions
fear of norm violation, no one has used cyber weapons to great effect and no one wants to be first.

5. 2. We Need Cyber Theories and Data
Pre-Theory
Cyber Regionalism
Most rival interactions in cyberspace will have a regional context connected to territorial considerations or disputes
Cyber Espionage
The tendency to try to balance against a rival
The tactic is likely utilized to manage low-level proxy battles that avoid direct confrontations
Proxy Battles – Cyber Terrorism
Cyber terrorism is real, but limited and mostly, ineffective
We generally locate this process through targeting a rival state in order to weaken an enemy. It might also be that cyber terrorism is utilized by states to fight proxy battles.

6. 3. Low Rate of Usage for Cyber Tactics
20 or 126 rivals engage in cyber conflict
Average severity is 1.65
111 incidents 45 disputes

7. 3. Low Rate of Usage for Cyber Tactics

8. 4. The Actions We Have Seen Have Been Low in Severity
The average severity level for cyber incidents is 1.62 and for disputes is These numbers lie between the least severe to second least severe scores. This means that most cyber conflict between rival states tend to be mere nuisances, disruptions, and benign.

9. 5. Most Cyber Incidents are Regional

10. Cyber incidents and disputes involving European states

11. 6. There Has Been Little Reaction to the Cyber Operations, so far…

12. 6. There Has Been Little Reaction to the Cyber Operations, so far…

13. 7. Many Cyber Incidents would be classified as Espionage
Twenty-six of the 107 cyber incidents (24 percent) are cyber espionage incidents. Twelve of the 44 cyber disputes (27 percent) in our data are cyber espionage campaigns.

14. 8. Cyber Terrorism is an Inflated Threat

15. Future Directions and Assessment
More Data/Training/Social Science versus Hype/Norms and Institutions