MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Modelling Attribution
Modelling Attribution
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Modelling Attribution
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Modelling Attribution
Modelling Attribution

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Modelling Attribution
Conference Proceeding

Modelling Attribution

2013
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
This article posits that attribution is better approached as a process than as a problem. Departing from models for attribution emphasising its technical constraints, the article distinguishes between two distinct attribution processes operating in two different contexts and answering two different questions. On one hand, in a criminal context, the attribution process seeks to identify individuals who launched cyber attacks. On the other hand, in a national security context, the process seeks to identify adversaries which may have sponsored cyber attacks. Five elements can serve as determinants to distinguish between the two processes: the type of target, the severity and scale of the damage, the apparent origin of the instigator of the attack, the means of the attack, and lastly the claims by political groups. After reviewing these elements, the article analyses how the constraints and characteristics of the two different attribution processes vary in terms of responsible authority, standard of evidence, stake in play and relevance of timing for attribution. In a criminal context, the collection of digital evidence is of primary importance to be able to reach a high level of judicial proof. However, in a national security context, investigators will likely not have access to evidence but only to intelligence, and the decision of attribution will not be taken within the judiciary but within the executive (e.g. a government). As such, attribution of national security incidents requires a form of political judgement to heed the political context and circumstances of the incidents that courts do not need to consider when examining the guilt of criminals. Political judgement is also required to balance the consequences of attribution on a political level, potentially resulting in a straining of relations with other international actors. As the constraints between the two different attribution processes differ, their requirements for easing the constraints also vary. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]