Information Warfare

How does Libicki define "Information Warfare"? How does his definition differ from previously used definitions? Do you agree with him or do you think one of the older definitions is more accurate?

Libicki currently defines information warfare as, “the use of information to attack information.”(Libicki, 2007) The definition differs significantly from the previously used definitions in that it is more of a “fuzzy” or general definition compared to the binary definitions offered before. In the binary definitions, there was an attempt to definitively parse out what was considered within the realm of information warfare and what was not.

I believe the binary definitions were a bit premature in nature due to the rapid pace of advancement within cyberspace. I prefer Libicki’s definition since it easily accommodates advancements in technological capabilities and the many emerging technologies which utilize cyberspace. It also appears that the broad definition of information warfare has become the more prevalent and accepted definition being offered in academic circles. For example the Federation of American Scientists defines information warfare as, “a struggle over the information and communications process” (Lewis, n.d.).

What do you think of Libicki's assertion "There Is No Forced Entry in Cyberspace"? What does he mean? Do you agree? Support your stance with examples.

I believe what Libicki is implying by saying there is no forced entry in Cyberspace is twofold. First, in the classical sense, forced entry infers that the force which is used is physical force. In cyberspace, there is no physical force used to gain entry, although you could possibly construe that physically tapping into a communication wire is indeed forced entry.

Secondly, the attacker is generally not creating his avenue of attack. The attacker is simply taking advantage of the weaknesses which are already present on the system. I cannot remember where I heard this phrase, but I find...