The Monopoly of Violence in the Cyber Space: Challenges of Cyber Security

  • Roxana Georgiana RaduEmail author
Part of the Global Power Shift book series (GLOBAL)


The conceptualization of cyber security is currently in the making. In the last decade, the frequent concerns with power and control in the cyber space, coupled with attempts at diminishing the risks posed by ‘invisible actors’ to critical infrastructure while ensuring free access, have represented real challenges to the adoption of national cyber security frameworks. In spite of the wide acknowledgement of cyber threats as a global problem, limited efforts to adopt a common approach towards reducing risks were undertaken till now at the international level. With more than 26% of world’s population using the Internet as of 2009 (ITU 2010: ix), the cyber risks are growing. According to Libicki, only in the US, the “estimates of the damage from today’s cyber attacks range from hundreds of billions of dollars to just a few billion dollars per year” (2009: xv).


Informational Power Invisible Actor Critical Infrastructure Protection Preemptive Action Virtual Realm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ball, G. (1968). The discipline of power: Essentials of a modern world structure. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
  2. Barnes, B. (1988). The nature of power. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  3. Barnett, M., & Duvall, R. (2005). Power in international politics. International Organization, 59, 39–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. BBC News. (2007). Estonia hit by <Moscow cyber war>, 17 May 2007.
  5. Billo, C., & Chang, W. (2004). Cyber warfare: an analysis of the means and motivations of selected nation states. Institute for Security Technology Study, Dartmouth College, report available at
  6. Braman, S. (2007). Change of state: Information, policy, and power. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bridis, T. (2001). Net Espionage rekindles cold-war tensions – U.S. tries to identify hackers. Wall Street Journal, 27 June 2001.
  8. British- North American Committee. (2007). Cyber attack: A risk management primer for CEOs and directors.
  9. Castells, M. (1998). End of millennium, the information age: Economy, society and culture (Vol. III). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. Conway, M. (2008). Media, fear and the Hyperreal: The construction of cyberterrorism as the ultimate threat to critical infrastructures. In M. Dunn Cavelty & K. S. Kristensen (Eds.), Securing ‘The Homeland’: Critical infrastructure, risk and (In)security (pp. 109–129). London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  11. Cornish, P., Hughes, R., & Livingstone, D. (2009). Cyberspace and the national security of the United Kingdom Chatham House Report.
  12. De Kloet, J. (2002). Digitisation and its Asian discontents: The Internet, politics and hacking in China and Indonesia. First Monday, 7(9).
  13. Denning, D. (2000). Hacktivism: An emerging threat to diplomacy, American Foreign Service Association.
  14. Dunn Cavelty, M. (2007). Critical information infrastructure: Vulnerabilities, threats and responses. UNIDIR Disarmament Forum, 2007(3), 15–22.Google Scholar
  15. Dunn Cavelty, M. (2010). Cyber-threats. In M. Dunn Cavelty & V. Mauer (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of security studies. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Dunn Cavelty, M., & Kristensen, K. S. (2008). Securing the homeland: Critical infrastructure, risk and (in)security. In M. Dunn Cavelty & K. S. Kristensen (Eds.), Securing ‘the Homeland’: Critical infrastructure, risk and (in)security. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Dunn Cavelty, M., & Rolofs, O. (2011). From cyberwar to cybersecurity: Proportionality of fear and countermeasures. Munich Security Conference, Munich, 3–4 Feb 2011. Paper available at[tt_news]=560&tx_ttnews[backPid]=92&cHash=55e618dc7b.Google Scholar
  18. Everard, J. (2000). Virtual states: The Internet and the boundaries of the nation–state. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Foucault, M. (1983). The subject and power. In H. Dreyfus & P. Rabinow (Eds.), Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics (2nd ed., pp. 208–226). Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Galliers, R. (2004). Reflections on information systems strategizing. In C. Avgerou, C. Ciborra, & F. Land (Eds.), The social study of information and communication technology (pp. 231–262). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Geers, K. (2010). A brief introduction to cyber warfare, Common Defense Quarterly (Spring), 16–17Google Scholar
  22. Gibson, W. (1985). Neuromancer. New York: Ace Books.Google Scholar
  23. Granger, J. (1978). Technology and international relations. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
  24. Hart, J. A. (1976). Three approaches to the measurement of power in international relations. International Organization, 30(2), 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hart, J.A. (1989), ISDN and power, Discussion Paper 7, Center for Global Business, the Business School of Indiana UniversityGoogle Scholar
  26. Hart, J. A. & Kim, S. (2000). Power in the information age. In J. Ciprut (Ed.), Of fears and foes: Security and insecurity in an evolving global political economy (pp. 35–58). Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  27. Hayashi, M. (2007). The information revolution and the rules of jurisdiction in public international law. In M. Dunn, S. F. Krishna-Hensel, & V. Mauer (Eds.), The resurgence of the state: Trends and processes in cyberspace governance (pp. 59–83). Aldershot/Hampshire: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  28. Herrera, G. L. (2007). Cyberspace and Sovereignty: Thoughts on physical space and digital space. In M. Dunn Cavelty, V. Mauer, & S. F. Krishna-Hensel (Eds.), Power and security in the information age: Investigating the role of the state in cyberspace (pp. 67–94). Aldershot/Hampshire: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  29. Hughes, R. (2010). A treaty for cyberspace. International Affairs, 86(2), 523–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. IBM. (2010). Meeting the cybersecurity challenge: Empowering Stakeholders and. Ensuring Coordination. IBM U.S. Federal. White Paper.
  31. International Telecommunication Union. (2010). Measuring the Information Society.
  32. Jordan, T. (1999). Cyberpower: The culture and politics of cyberspace and the internet. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kirk, D. (2009). What’s behind cyber attacks on South Korea, US?. CSMonitor, 8 July 2009.
  34. Krause, K. (2009). War, violence and the state. In M. Brzoska & A. Krohn (Eds.), Securing peace in a globalized world (pp. 183–202). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  35. Kshetri, N. (2005). Pattern of global cyber war and crime: A conceptual framework. Journal of International Management, 11, 541–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kuehl, D. (2009). From cyberspace to cyberpower: Defining the problem. In F. Kramer, S. Starr, & L. K. Wentz (Eds.), Cyberpower and national security (pp. 24–42). Washington, DC: National Defense University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Lenk, K. (1997). The challenge of cyberspacial forms of human interaction to territorial governance and policing. In B. D. Loader (Ed.), The governance of cyberspace: Politics, technology and global restructuring. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Libicki, M. (2007). Conquest in cyberspace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Libicki, M. (2009). Cyberdeterrance and cyberwar. Santa Monica: RAND.Google Scholar
  40. Loader, B. D. (1997). The governance of cyberspace: Politics, technology and global restructuring. In B. D. Loader (Ed.), The governance of cyberspace: Politics, technology and global restructuring. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McMahon, P. (2002). Global control: Information technology and globalization since 1846. Cheltenham: Northampton.Google Scholar
  42. Mills, E. (2009). Botnet worm in DOS attacks could wipe data out on infected PCs, CNet News, 10 July 2009.
  43. Moses, A. (2008). Georgian websites forces offline in <cyber war>, Sunday Morning Herald, 12 Aug 2008.
  44. Myers, S. L. (2007). Cyberattack on Estonia stirs fear of <virtual war>. New York Times, 18 May 2007.
  45. Nazario, J. (2008). Georgia DDoS attacks - a quick summary of observations, Arbor Networks, 12 Aug 2008.
  46. Nye, J. (2010). Cyber power. Harvard Kennedy School, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.
  47. Ottis, R., & Lorents, P. (2010). Cyberspace: Definition and implications. Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, Tallinn, Estonia.
  48. Price, M. (2002). Media and sovereignty: The global information revolution and its challenge to state power. Cambridge/London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  49. Sabourin, C. (2011). Chinese hackers behind cyber attack on Canada: Report, (February 17).
  50. Sassen, S. (2000). Digital networks and the state: Some governance questions. Theory Culture & Society, 17(4), 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shahin, H. (2007). The reassersion of the state: Governance and the information revolution. In M. Dunn, S. F. Krishna-Hensel, & V. Mauer (Eds.), The resurgence of the state: Trends and processes in cyberspace governance. Aldershot/Hampshire: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  52. Singh, J. P. (2007). Meta-power, networks, security and commerce. In M. Dunn Cavelty, V. Mauer, & S. F. Krishna-Hensel (Eds.), Power and security in the information age: Investigating the role of the state in cyberspace (pp. 45–66). Aldershot/Hampshire: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  53. Sommer, P., & Brown, I. (2011). Reducing systemic cybersecurity risk. OECD report for Future Global Shocks Project.
  54. Sperling, J. (2010). The post-Westphalian state, national security cultures, and the global security governance, EU-GRASP Working Paper no. 15.
  55. Stone, A. (2001). Cyberspace: The next battlefield. USA Today, 19 June 2001.
  56. Sulek, D., & Moran, N. (2009). What analogies can tell us about the future of cybersecurity. In C. Czosseck & K. Geers (Eds.), The virtual battlefield: Perspectives on cyber warfare (pp. 118–131). Amsterdam: Ios Press.Google Scholar
  57. Technews. (2011). Catastrophic effects that cyber-attacks may have. 28 Jan 2011.
  58. Tikk, E., Kaska, K., Rünnimeri, K., Kert, M., Talihärm, A.-M., & Vihul, L. (2008). Cyber attacks against Georgia: Legal lessons identified. Analysis document by the Cooperative Cyber Defense Center of Excellence (Tallinn, Estonia).
  59. Toffler, A. (1990). PowerShift: Knowledge, wealth, and violence at the edge of the 21 st century. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
  60. Traynor, I. (2007). Russia accused of unleashing cyberwar to disable Estonia. The Guardian, 17 May 2007.Google Scholar
  61. van Loon, J. (2000). Virtual risks in an age of cybernetic reproduction. In B. Adam, U. Beck, & J. van Loon (Eds.), The risk society and beyond: Critical issues for social theory (pp. 165–182). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  62. Weber, M. (1952a). Class, status, party. In H. Gerth & C. Wright Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber (pp. 180–195). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  63. Weber, M. (1952b). In G. Roth & W. Claus (Eds.), Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  64. Whitelaw, K. (2007). A high-tech Achilles heel: Washington plans stepped up defenses against cyberattacks. U.S. News and World Report, 26 Oct 2007.
  65. Wulf, H. (2004). The bumpy road to re-establish a monopoly of violence. Paper prepared for Study Group on Europe’s Security Challenges, London School of Economics.
  66. Yonhap (2009). North Korean ministry behind July cyber attacks: Spy chief, 30 Oct 2009.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Media and Communication StudiesCentral European UniversityBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations