Philosophy and Technology 28 (3):387-405 (2015)

This article argues that the traditional jus ad bellum and jus in bello criteria are fully capable of providing the ethical guidance needed to legitimately conduct military cyber operations. The first part examines the criteria’s foundations by focusing on the notion of liability to defensive harm worked out by revisionist just war thinkers. The second part critiques the necessity of alternative frameworks, which its proponents assert are required to at least supplement the traditional just war criteria. Using the latter, the third part evaluates ethical issues germane to responding to cyber force, including casus belli, moral aspects of “the attribution problem,” and respective rights and duties when attacks involve innocent third-party states. The fourth part addresses in bello issues, including compliance with discrimination, necessity, and civilian due care imperatives; whether civilians may be targeted with sub-“use of force” cyber-attacks and the permissibility of using civilian contractors to conduct cyber-attacks. Throughout these analyses, conclusions are brought into conversation with those of The Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare
Keywords Military cyber  Just war  Forfeiture  Jus ad bellum  Jus in bello  Information ethics  Attribution  Tallinn Manual
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s13347-014-0185-4
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 57,199
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Killing in War.Jeff McMahan - 2009 - Oxford University Press.
Proportionality in the Morality of War.Thomas Hurka - 2005 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (1):34-66.
Can We Harm and Benefit in Creating?Elizabeth Harman - 2004 - Philosophical Perspectives 18 (1):89–113.
A Defense of the Counterfactual Comparative Account of Harm.Justin Klocksiem - 2012 - American Philosophical Quarterly 49 (4):285 – 300.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Violence, Just Cyber War and Information.Massimo Durante - 2015 - Philosophy and Technology 28 (3):369-385.
The Cyber Combatant: A New Status for a New Warrior.Maurizio D’Urso - 2015 - Philosophy and Technology 28 (3):475-478.
Confronting Cyber Warfare: Rethinking the Ethics of Cyber War.Bassam Romaya & Lisa Portmess - 2013 - Journal for Peace and Justice Studies 23 (1):44-60.
Cyber Conflicts: Addressing the Regulatory Gap.Ludovica Glorioso - 2015 - Philosophy and Technology 28 (3):333-338.
Justice in Cyberwar.Klaus-Gerd Giesen - 2014 - Ethic@ - An International Journal for Moral Philosophy 13 (1):27-49.
Just Information Warfare.Mariarosaria Taddeo - 2016 - Topoi 35 (1):213-224.
Ethics and Cyber Conflict: A Response to JME 12:1 (2013).George R. Lucas Jr - 2014 - Journal of Military Ethics 13 (1):20-31.


Added to PP index

Total views
37 ( #275,584 of 2,411,831 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #121,582 of 2,411,831 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes