International Panel Discussion on 'A Comprehensive Study of Active Cyber Defence'
summary
Japan's cyber strategy endorses penetration and neutralization of foreign targets to protect national security and critical infrastructure, but those measures risk breaching sovereignty and the non‑intervention rule. Internationally, three legal justifications compete: self‑defense (usually unavailable below an armed attack), countermeasures require attribution, demand, notification and proportionality, and necessity (very high threshold but no attribution required). Domestic law currently criminalizes intrusions and shutdowns, so legalization needs a new statutory doctrine, clear agency mandates, human‑rights safeguards and tight targeting to avoid disproportionate harm.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (6)
- 0:00Introduction
- 7:19Active cyber defense under law
- 20:14National statements
- 43:08Japan’s law and active cyber defense
- 51:04Practical aspects of operations
- 1:02:22Closing remarks and Q&A
related talks
21mCyber Vigilante or Self Defense?
40mDeterrence and Strategic Response to Cyber Operations
42mThe CCEL and the Thin Line Between Cyber Defence and Pre-emption…
01h 01mDay 1 Keynote: Diplomacy and Combating Evolving International Cyber Threats
41mIndustrialising Cyber Defence in an Asymmetric World
01h 10mFive minutes to midnight: Averting cyberwar
40mThe Cyber Solarium Commission: What is Left to Be Done?
50mDefeating Covert Foreign Influence While Protecting Free Expression