The Use of Force and Cyber Countermeasures
32 Temple International & Comparative Law Journal 127 (2018)
2018
- 4,549Usage
- 4Captures
- 2Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Most Recent News
Punching on the Edges of the Grey Zone: Iranian Cyber Threats and State Cyber Responses
The recent escalation in hostilities between the United States and Iran has raised intense debates about the propriety and legality of both parties’ uses of
Paper Description
In a global environment where most unfriendly acts between nations fall below the threshold of a use of force, the doctrine of countermeasures can be an important tool for states. However, in the realm of cyber operations, the rules governing the application of countermeasures result in unrealistic constraints on states. Particularly when compared with the much lesser constraints on the exercise of self-defense, limitations such as the prohibitions on anticipatory and collective countermeasures, the requirement to provide prior notice, and the unavailability of countermeasures to confront non-state actors highlight this imbalance. Cyber countermeasures are uniquely situated to become an effective means of countering cyber threats and remedying violations of international law, but the limitations disincentivize states from employing them and encourage resort to more aggressive responses by redefining opposing state and non-state actions as more serious to avoid such limitations and provide greater freedom of action. Relaxing the limitations on cyber countermeasures is one way to allow states to take more proportional and less forceful actions to prevent otherwise illegal acts, and bring violators back into compliance.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know