Reference no: EM131257182

Before doing this assignment, be sure you are familiar with the General Instructions for Discussion Assignments found in the Course Information Module.

Through the first five modules, you learned about some of the cyberattacks that have taken place and about what could happen in the future. If we look at all of this from the perspective of the three elements of deterrence, I think it's fair to say that it appears that the US capability to deny attacks or to be resilient in the face of attacks is not very effective.

That leaves the "response" element of deterrence. We've read about a few things that the US has done in response to cyberattacks:

The US indicted several members of the Chinese military for economic cyber espionage.

The US indicted several Iranians for DDOS attacks against US banks and an attack against the Bowman Dam.

The US imposed some limited economic sanctions against North Korea in response to the attack on Sony (limited primarily because there are already so many economic sanctions against North Korea).

So the question for this discussion is:

Should the US be responding more strongly against cyberattacks from foreign countries, and if so, how?

Now admittedly, there's a possibility that the US has responded more strongly, but not publicly. That brings up another question you could answer if you'd rather:

Should the US government publicly announce anything it does to another country in response to a cyberattack from that country?

Both of these questions are directly related to the question the textbook raises "Who has the Advantage, the Offense or the Defense?"