Marie Neill Sciarrone

Warfare has traditionally been executed within easily defined periods of time and geographic boundaries. These conflicts have been fought on identifiable terrain in the air, on the ground, under the sea and, as of the last 20 years, in space.

Even the changing tools of war have been easily defined: the rifle, bomb, aircraft, tank, ship, et al. Some of the newer tools, such as the improvised explosive device, are equally tangible and identifiable.

But the internet has opened a whole new domain for warfare. There are no geographical boundaries. Cyberwarfare is a game-changer in how we assess our enemies, meet their challenges and enact policies that match the growth of the cyberdomain.

To understand cyberwarfare, we need a clear understanding of what the term means and how this form of battle differs from traditional warfare. Unfortunately, no universal definition of cyberwarfare exists. Even agreement on a single way to spell the term has proven elusive. Is it “cyber warfare,” “Cyber-warfare,” “Cyberwarfare” or “Cyber warfare”?

The subtle differences reflect a large difference in the word’s connotation. Is the emphasis on “cyber”? Is the emphasis on “war” to reflect an offensive focus versus a more conventional defensive positioning? Or is the term meant to reflect a select type of warfare? Is it only limited to actions taken on a computer?

It also is important to differentiate a cyberattack from cyberwarfare. Calling it “war” implies a wider scope and longevity. An attack is understood to be a singular event, while war is a series of attacks.

My emphasis is on using a digital means to attack an opponent — what constitutes an attack and the warranted response.

Cyberwarfare should not be thought of as computer against computer, but a much broader concept. These attacks could range from state-sponsored infiltration with the objective of disrupting information systems to hackers trying to make a political statement or influence outcomes.

With the advent of nonstate-sponsored terrorist organizations and the ubiquity of internet access, offensive cyberattacks have become frequent occurrences. Reaching agreement on terms and meanings will be critical to achieving and determining how to best deal with this new type of warfare.

The Department of Defense and others have spent billions viewing cyberspace and solutions in traditional physical terms — likely because that is what is familiar to