Communication and information technology have changed gradually over time and are now incorporated virtually into people’s daily lives. Cyberterrorism can be defined as critical disruption caused by Information Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure to promote the attackers’ underlying religious, social, or political issues. Assailants may prefer this kind of terrorism because it saves time and allows them to stay anonymous to their subjects. Cyberterrorism can be carried out by a single individual or more than two who have a plan that they want to accomplish. Various aspects can be analyzed concerning cyberterrorism, competing factors, and possible course of actions in corporations to show that cyberterrorism is a legitimate option for the expression of grievances by terrorists.
One of the reasons why cyberterrorism is a legitimate option for terrorist and insurgent groups is that they can reach a vast number of targets at a given time. A cyber-attack can target computer networks in institutions, individuals, or a particular government. As long as the attackers can find a niche in any network, they can exploit the target. Since all computer systems and infrastructures running large agencies are highly complicated, it is impossible to mitigate all weaknesses (Ibrahim et al., 2017). Hence, many terrorists may take this impossibility to their advantage.
Another reason cyberterrorism can be legitimate is because of its anonymous nature. Like any other internet platform, such as Facebook and Twitter, terrorists could use alias or screen names to hide their identities from the world. This approach can make it hard for security agencies to track down the culprits. Lastly, cyberterrorism can be a legitimate way to present their views since the risk of mortality is shallow. Legitimacy in this scenario can be determined since killings are not guaranteed, whereby only data is held as leverage by the terrorist until they get what they are demanding.
Competing factions in the contemporary world can also be evaluated to determine how they can impact cyberterrorism. Typically, they involve various groups which contend to gain power or money. Advanced technology in the modern world has also made it easier for parties to access data illegally in organizations (Jarvis et al., 2016). Artificial intelligence has increased the risk of data loss in firms since many people have developed hacking schemes. In most cases, the competing factions in the current society involve three basic outbreak strategies.
Many parties term the attack on the firm’s gateways as the easiest of the cyber-attacks and the outbreak on the corporation’s core operating systems as the most sophisticated kind of occurrence. The culprit’s level of investment and technology determines the spasm level to indulge in, as every spell strategy requires different skills (Gross et al., 2017). The most uncomplicated spell strategy is violence on the business’ gateway.
This kind of outbreak disrupts the company’s daily life, denying the subject entry, and does not cause lasting or irreversible damage. Such assaults in the modern world are carried out for banks, traffic lights, cellular service providers, and stock exchange services. Another most used gateway occurrence involving competing factions entails an attack on the domain name system. These are servers that businesses use to route their internet services. This kind of spell redirects a person trying to acquire a particular organization’s data to another site.
An attack on the enterprise’s information systems is complicated as it requires one to have access to the corporation’s computer systems. Entrance to the administration’s plans can be attained by having an insider for the job or other means (Wirtz & Weyerer, 2016). This kind of spell does not cause much physical damage but can cause massive destruction and business data loss. Spasm on the company’s core operation systems is ranked the highest cyber-attack level that requires many skills to accomplish. Therefore, these aspects can be examined when focusing on competing factions and cyberterrorism in the current world.
A possible course of action to help prevent future cyberterrorism may include the development of the active cyber defense. With a dynamic cyber defense structure, it would become almost impossible to attack as there would be strengthened security measures on every network and system. With such actions, the government will be obliged to work with agencies and provide its unique capabilities and expertise to bring this change and respond to cyber threats. Another possible course of action would be building a more secure internet in various regions.
The government is expected to take the lead in creating this secure network because it has all the resources and expertise required. Building the web will ensure that future online services and products are secured by default. When a connected network is enabled, organizations will be able to sell their products without fear of cyber-attacks since commodities will be protected by default. Nations can also implement policies that are designed to alleviate cyberterrorism. For instance, America has the Inter-American Committee against Terrorism, which ensures that cyberterrorism is curbed in the country using various rules (Marsili, 2019). Lastly, covering the national infrastructure and other priority sectors that provide essential services to the government would prevent many losses in case of an attack.
The analysis has revealed that cyberterrorism is a legitimate option for the expression of grievances by terrorists since the loss of life is curbed. Additionally, the approach is appropriate since it helps assailants to reach a vast number of targets at a given time without hurting individuals. Although cyberterrorism cannot be entirely eradicated, people should develop ways to minimize its spread by securing networks by default. Furthermore, securing every organization’s software should be the number one priority since every government generates revenue from businesses.
References
Gross, M., Canetti, D., & Vashdi, D. (2017). Cyberterrorism: Its effects on psychological well-being, public confidence, and political attitudes. Journal of Cybersecurity, 1(3), 49–58. Web.
Ibrahim, J., Yahaya, N., & Seissa, I. (2017). Cyberterrorism definition patterns and mitigation strategies: A literature review. International Journal of Science and Research, 6(1), 180–186. Web.
Jarvis, L., Macdonald, S., & Whiting, A. (2016). Unpacking cyberterrorism discourse: Specificity, status, and scale in news media constructions of threat. European Journal of International Security, 2(1), 64–87. Web.
Marsili, M. (2019). The war on cyberterrorism. Democracy and security, 15(2), 172–199. Web.
Wirtz, B., & Weyerer, J. (2016). Cyberterrorism and cyber-attacks in the public sector: How public administration copes with digital threats. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(13), 1085–1100. Web.