Page 222

REVISTA IEEE 9

224 Journal of the Spanish Institute for Strategic Studies Núm. 9 / 2017 relations with its benefactor to evolve throughout a conflict, especially when the proxy is jealous of its autonomy and has a different outlook as to how it should advance towards its objectives. PROBLEMS OF DELEGATION Although delegation upon other actors permits the State sponsor to elude a part of any reprisals, it also reduces the effectiveness of the action of proxies, since their capacity for coercion cannot benefit from the direct and explicit involvement of their benefactor. Cyber conflict is in any case a manifestation of the exertion of the power of the State, which maintains the political objective of forcing another actor to do, or cease doing36, something along the lines of its own interests. Cyber attacks maintain this political nature, and as such, the final aim is to coerce both the adversary and potential contenders. Nonetheless, the more a disconnection (real or simulated) is assumed to exist between a proxy and a State, the less its coercive power, since the only tools at its disposition to break the will of the victim are those which it has revealed with its cyber attack, as it has no recourse to the threat of an escalation employing the resources available to its sponsor. This was the case with the so-called “Comodo Hack”, wherein a “patriotic Iranian hacker” claimed to have gained control over the digital certificates administered by authorization from Comodo Certifications, and which are used to authenticate such popular electronic mail services as Google Gmail, Yahoo Mail, or Microsoft Hotmail. This appropriation had supposedly given him the capacity to spy within these mails “the same as do the United States and Israel.” The author of this attack took it upon himself through a communiqué to manifest the political nature of this action, accusing Western governments and companies of conspiring to spy upon and cyber attack his country. Referring to the so-called Green Movement and the terrorist group Organization of the Mujahaddins of the People (MKO in its English abbreviation), he stated that: “I am not going to permit anyone within Iran to harm the Iranian people, injure the nuclear scientists of my country, injure my leader (…) for these people, there is no privacy on Internet, they have no security in the digital world”37. Nonetheless, within the communiqué itself he underlined the individual nature of this action, stating that it was a question of a “21-year-old programmer” with no links to any group. His emphasis on the individual character of this attack detracted from the forcefulness of his threats, as is shown by the fact that this action has produced no modification in the behavior of his recipients. 36  BETZ, David and STEVENS, Tim, “Power and cyberspace”, Adelphi Series, Vol. 51, nº 424 (2011), pp. 9-34. 37  BRIGHT, Peter, “Independent Iranian Hacker Claims Responsibility for Comodo Hack”, Wired (March 28 2011). http./www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/03/comodo hack. http://revista.ieee.es/index.php/ieee

REVISTA IEEE 9
To see the actual publication please follow the link above