Connect with us

E-Business

In Absence of Rules, Cyber Terrorists Attack Nations

Published

on

Kindly share this post

The systematic crash of the computer systems of banks and TV broadcasters in South Korea — reportedly the result of an attack that was widely speculated to have been launched by North Korea — raises questions about what international laws, if any, govern the new and unexplored area of cyberwarfare.

“The answer is there’s nothing and there’s everything,” said Michael Schmitt, professor and chairman of the international law department at the U.S. Naval War College.

Schmitt, who was asked by the NATO Co-operative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence to look into these issues, chaired a three-year project that brought together 20 academics and practitioners from around the world.

 CBC, the leading Canadian media reported that the culmination of their efforts was the recently published Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare.

“If you’re looking for cyber specific law, a law that says ‘a cyberattack that causes these consequences in an armed attack to which you can respond,’ you will find nothing,” he said. “But it was our unanimous consensus among the group of experts that the existing international law applies to cyberspace and to cyberweapons.”

This means that, as international law permits a country to defend itself and retaliate if attacked by conventional weapons, a country that is the victim of a cyberattack that causes damage or death, may also retaliate, either through cyberwarfare or conventional weapons.

“Hack into a control system of a dam and release waters downstream. Those waters are going to cause significant damage, physical damage, people will drown. In my mind that’s clearly an armed attack,” Schmitt said.

 “And if someone did that to Canada, you could resort to force, not only cyber but armed force to defend yourself.”

Other examples of cyberwarfare that are grounds for retaliation by force could include hacking into a water treatment plant and causing chemicals to flow into the water, thereby poisoning the population, hacking into air traffic control systems and causing planes to crash, or hacking into a hospital and changing people’s blood type, causing harm to patients

But the attack on South Korea, if in fact North Korea was responsible, is different, Schmitt said.

 The attack is certainly a violation of South Korea’s sovereignty and a violation of international law, he said, but not grounds for the use of force in response.

“We would call that a below the threshold operation that certainly would permit a response from South Korea but the response could not include armed force,” Schmitt said.

The retaliatory options for South Korea would include countermeasures. These are actions that can be taken by the aggrieved state that would normally be unlawful under international law but are considered acceptable because the aggressor state violated international law first.

“If state A attacks state B’s banking system, state B may then respond proportionally against state A’s banking system to compel state A to knock it off,” Schmitt said.

His group also looked at issues surrounding cyberattacks on civilians. Under international law and the principle of distinction, when on the battlefield, operations may only be directed against military objects and combatants and not civilians.

“We asked the question ‘when is a cyber operation a forbidden attack?’ There are all sorts of things you can do in cyberspace against civilians during an armed conflict that doesn’t physically harm them and doesn’t injure them,” he said. For example, erasing personal data or messing with their banking records.

“What we said is that this is a very hard question. Not unanimous, but the majority said that an attack, in the law of war, means you physically harm someone, you break something, you cause physical damage or you interfere in the functionality of an object such that it needs to be actually repaired.”

Ashley Deeks, an associate professor at the University of Virginia School of Law and an expert in international law, said many of the scenarios are case by case.

“Even in the kinetic world, there is no real definition of what an armed attack is,” she said, adding that states look to past practices.

For example, the Stuxnet computer virus, reportedly launched by the U.S. that attacked and destroyed hundreds of centrifuges at the Natanz uranium enrichment facility in Iran, raised these issues.

“I guess I would just characterize it as the closest thing we’ve seen to a cyber action that produces real world effects, not dissimilar from what a kinetic attack would do. But I’m not prepared to say it was an armed attack.”

That’s why a lot of people are starting to devote a lot of attention to cyberwarfare and trying to sort out where the lines are, Deeks said.

“There are a lot of question marks. If you took out a banking system, and it caused massive instability in the country … that could be construed as an armed attack by some states. But it’s really an open question,” she said.

“There would be other states that say, ‘No, unless people die, things blow up, not an armed attack. We want to set a high threshold.’ Others say, ‘That ‘s crazy. You want to start deterring these things. You want to call lower level things armed attacks.”

However, Schmitt said he believes all these thresholds will evolve over the next decade.

“I anticipate that we’ll see a lot of thresholds coming down that will allow states to respond more vibrantly to cyber attacks that might not be possible under the law as we found it.”

 


Kindly share this post

Dear Reader, Your support matters. But we believe that technology makes life more exciting and helps improve the lives of people around Nigeria and indeed the world. That is why, we have devoted our energy to independent reportage of technology and finance and how they affect lives. Our incisive and analytical view of how technology news affects the daily life help individuals and organizations make up their minds. Quality journalism costs money. Today, we're asking that you support us to do more. Kindly support our effort to deliver technology and finance journalism to everyone in the world. Donate as little as N1,000. Bank transfers can be made to: UBA Plc 1017156876 Communication Week Media Ltd

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Comments

E-Business

Gold Hits Record $5,110/Ounce Amid Trump Tariff Threats, Geopolitical Fears

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Gold prices smashed through $5,100 per ounce on Monday, January 26, surging to a historic peak of $5,110.50 as investors rushed into the safe-haven asset amid escalating geopolitical tensions and U.S. policy volatility.

Gold Hits Record $5,110/Ounce Amid Trump Tariff Threats, Geopolitical Fears

Gold

Spot gold climbed 2.2% to $5,089.78 by 0656 GMT, while U.S. February futures rose similarly to $5,086.30. The metal, up 64% in 2025—its strongest annual gain since 1979—has now advanced over 18% year-to-date, fueled by safe-haven buying, anticipated U.S. rate cuts, China’s 14th consecutive month of central bank purchases in December, and massive ETF inflows.

Analysts point to a crisis of confidence in U.S. assets, sparked by President Trump’s erratic threats last week. He retreated from tariffs on European allies to pressure Greenland seizure, then vowed 100% tariffs on Canada over a potential China trade deal and 200% on French wines to push President Emmanuel Macron toward a “Board of Peace” initiative.

“This Trump administration has caused a permanent rupture in global norms, driving everyone to gold as the sole refuge,” said Kyle Rodda, senior market analyst at Capital.com.

A weakening dollar—hit by a rising yen and pre-Fed meeting caution—further boosted gold’s appeal for non-dollar holders, with markets eyeing possible yen intervention.


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Business

Firm Identifies AI as Common Denominator in Entertainment Industry’s 2026 Security Threats

Published

on

Kindly share this post

In its Kaspersky Security Bulletin, the cybersecurity company’s researchers identified critical threats expected to affect the global entertainment industry in 2026, from ticketing and visual effects pipelines to content delivery networks, games and regulation.

Artificial intelligence is changing how people buy tickets, watch movies and play games – and it is also changing how malicious actors target those experiences.

The entertainment industry is particularly sensitive to AI because the technology does not only automate back-office workflows; it increasingly creates and imitates the core product itself – human-centered stories, performances and visual experiences.

Kaspersky researchers highlighted five critical threats emerging as AI integrates deeper into entertainment workflows and consumer experiences.

What happens when ticket markets become an arms race between algorithms and scalpers? Kaspersky predicts that AI will make dynamic pricing faster and more granular, while also giving scalpers better tools to identify profitable events, deploy bots at scale and manage resale pricing across multiple platforms.

Even when artists choose fixed face values, AI-driven resellers can recreate “dynamic” pricing on secondary markets by adjusting prices in real time based on demand signals.

How will AI-commodified visual effects affect the risk of leaks? As high-end computer-generated imagery becomes more accessible through cloud-based AI platforms, studios will connect to larger networks of small vendors and freelancers.

Kaspersky expects attackers to target this extended supply chain by compromising render farms, plug-ins or small post-production houses in order to quietly steal sequences, assets or episodes before release, bypassing more heavily protected studio environments.

Could content delivery networks become a direct target? CDNs now carry unreleased episodes, game builds and live streams for many major entertainment brands, concentrating valuable content in a small number of providers.

AI-enhanced attackers will be able to map CDN infrastructure more efficiently, locate where premium content resides and search for weak credentials or configuration errors. A single successful compromise could expose multiple titles at once or allow malicious code to be injected into legitimate streams.

How will generative tools change abuse patterns in games and fan communities? Players and power users will continue to jailbreak in-game AI companions and content editors, and to use external generative models to produce material that would normally be blocked – such as hyper-violent or sexualized scenarios – and then reimport it into games, mods, or fan videos.

There is also a risk of personal data appearing in “creative” outputs if training or fine-tuning data is not properly cleaned, for example, when lyrics, dialogue, or imagery inadvertently include real names or other identifying details.

What role will regulation and compliance play for AI in creative work? Lawmakers and industry groups are moving toward rules that require transparency about AI-generated media and clearer consent and licensing practices for training on copyrighted material.

Kaspersky expects this to drive the creation of new roles inside entertainment companies, similar to COVID-compliance managers on film sets, focused on AI governance: checking how AI tools are trained, how they are used in production and marketing, and whether they comply with contractual and legal requirements.

“As we examined different parts of the industry, it became clear that AI is the thread running through most of the emerging risks.

“By diving into this, we wanted to highlight that AI will not only help defenders detect anomalies faster, it will also help attackers model markets, probe infrastructure and generate convincing malicious content.

“Studios, platforms and rights holders need to treat AI systems, and the data behind them, as part of their core attack surface, not just as creative tools, and build security and governance around that reality,” said Anna Larkina, web content analysis expert at Kaspersky.

 


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Business

Firm Detected a Fivefold Surge in QR Code Phishing Attacks in the Second Half of 2025

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Kaspersky has reported a spike in phishing emails containing malicious QR codes. Detections for these jumped from 46,969 in August 2025 to 249,723 in November 2025 – a more than fivefold growth – as cybercriminals increasingly exploit QR codes, a trend that will likely continue in 2026.

Attackers use QR codes in emails more frequently because they provide a simple and cost-effective way to conceal malicious URLs, evading detection by many protective solutions.

These QR codes are often embedded directly in email bodies or, even more commonly, within PDF attachments – an evolution that both masks phishing links and encourages users to scan them on mobile phones, which may have weaker security than work PCs.

Malicious QR codes commonly appear in mass phishing campaigns as well as targeted ones. Links embedded within them may lead to:

  • Phishing forms impersonating login pages for services like Microsoft accounts or internal corporate portals, designed to steal usernames, passwords, and other credentials.
  • Fake HR notifications urging employees to review or sign documents, such as vacation schedules, or even view lists of terminated staff, ultimately directing to credential-stealing sites.
  • Fraudulent invoices or purchase confirmations in PDF attachments, often combined with vishing (voice phishing) tactics that prompt victims to call provided phone numbers to “cancel” or clarify the transaction, enabling further social engineering attacks.

These tactics exploit trust in routine business communications, leading to credential theft, account takeovers, data breaches, and financial fraud.

“Malicious QR codes have evolved into one of the most effective phishing tools, particularly when hidden in PDF attachments or disguised as legitimate business communications like HR updates.

“The explosive growth in November 2025 highlights how attackers are capitalising on this low-cost evasion technique to target employees on mobile devices, where protection is often minimal.

“Without advanced image analysis at the email gateway and safe scanning practices, organisations are left vulnerable to credential compromise and downstream breaches,” comments Roman Dedenok, Anti-Spam Expert at Kaspersky.

To defend against this escalating threat, Kaspersky recommends educating employees on cybersecurity and deploying a mail server security solution such as Kaspersky Security for Mail Server that provides trusted and secure corporate email exchange, countering spam, email-borne infections, all forms of phishing, business email compromise (BEC), QR code attacks, and other threats.


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Trending