Cyber espionage: methods, threats, and countermeasures

Abstract
Cyber espionage has become a critical component of modern cyber warfare as nation-states increasingly rely on cyberspace. However, cyber espionage had generated concerns regarding its acceptability given its potential threats to national security. This qualitative case study research explores the proposition that cyber security should be deemed an acceptable state behavior while cyber attack is unacceptable. This study seeks to answer the question, “How is cyber espionage an acceptable state behavior for intelligence gathering though it potentially damages relations between nation-states?” The qualitative case study examined existing studies on this issue and employed thematic analysis to analyze the data. The study found that cyber espionage is an acceptable state behavior since it plays a key role in cyber warfare, helps to establish appropriate countermeasures against cyberattacks and potential threats in cyberspace, and enhances intelligence gathering. While the study provides significant insights on this topic, future studies should examine the issue based on empirical or primary data.
Keywords: cyber espionage, acceptability, state behavior, cyberattacks, relationship, intelligence gathering, national security, cyber warfare, cyber capabilities.
Introduction
Cyberspace has become an important element in the operations of any given country since we are living in an information age. Countries across the globe use cyberspace for various purposes including business and in modern warfare. Cyberspace has developed into a crucial component of modern warfare as adversaries continue to exploit the potential of the Internet to carry out their activities. Cyberspace is used in the operational level and strategic level of modern warfare. At the strategic level, cyberspace is use to deter and influence the strategic balance of power in relation to the strengths and weaknesses of a state.[footnoteRef:1] As cyberspace dominates modern warfare, the concept and practice of cyber espionage has emerged. Cyber espionage refers to the practice of obtaining secrets with the permission of the owner/possessor of the information.[footnoteRef:2] As a form of cyberattack, cyber espionage is one of the most complex international problems in today’s world despite being seen as an acceptable state behavior. [1: Magnus Hjortdal, “China’s Use of Cyber Warfare: Espionage Meets Strategic Deterrence”, Journal of Strategic Security 4, no. 2 (2011):1] [2: Atul Agarwal & CERT-IN, “Cyber Espionage, Infiltration and Combating Techniques”, Indian Computer Emergency Response Team, 2013. https://www.cert-in.org.in/Downloader?pageid=5&type=2&fileName=CIPS-2013-0128.pdf]
Background Information
Cyber espionage has become one of the most important and complex international problem in today’s world. It can generate numerous risks or threats to security and other critical operations because it involves illegitimate possession of personal, sensitive, classified or proprietary information. Cyber espionage is carried out through various exploitation methods or techniques on individual computers, networks or the Internet. It incorporates intentional activities to infiltrate or penetrate computer systems/networks used by a rival to obtain information within or transmitted through these networks or systems.[footnoteRef:3] Cyber espionage is used by different nations across the globe including the United States, China and Russia despite concerns regarding its legitimacy and view as an acceptable state behavior. [3: William C. Banks, “Cyber Espionage and Electronic Surveillance: Beyond the Media Coverage”, Emory law Journal 66, (2017):513.]
Problem Statement
Cyber espionage involves illegal practices that result in information theft that could be used to attack an adversary. It poses threats and risks to relations between states and has become a complex international problem in the modern world. Cyber espionage is largely viewed as a new intelligence gathering approach and strategy for national security decisions. However, cyber espionage remains a form of cyberattack, which is legally and ethically unacceptable.
Research Question
How is cyber espionage an acceptable state behavior for intelligence gathering though it potentially damages relations between nation-states?
Purpose Statement
The purpose of this study is to examine the proposition that cyber espionage is an acceptable state behavior despite being a form of cyberattack, which is deemed unacceptable. The evaluation includes an exploration of norms that are established to promote the acceptability of cyber espionage despite its potential damaging impacts on relations between states.
Significance of the Study
This study will help address existing concerns regarding the acceptability of cyber espionage though it seemingly promotes information theft. It is important to study this issue because cyber espionage has generated numerous concerns regarding its legitimacy and acceptability vis-à-vis cyberattack as well as global security concerns.
Literature Review
The issue of cyber espionage has attracted considerable attention in existing literature because of the challenges it poses to international relations. Existing studies examine different aspects relating to cyber espionage and its increased use in the modern international relations framework as well as cyber warfare.
Proliferation of Cyber Espionage
Banks (2017) define cyber espionage as intentional activities used by an adversary to collect information resident on or transmitted through computer systems or networks.[footnoteRef:4] Cyber espionage has become common in the modern international relations framework due to use of cyberspace and the emergence of cyber warfare. In addition, the rise of cyber espionage is attributable to the long-standing practice of intelligence gathering and espionage in national security apparatus of every nation. Cyber espionage involves electronic surveillance of computer systems or networks to intercept communication between two or more parties. Using electronic surveillance, adversaries intercept what is said and planned. Such surveillance always result in processing and exploitation of huge volumes of communications transmitted on the Internet. Therefore, electronic surveillance has provided an avenue for transformation of conventional state-sponsored surveillance and espionage. [4: Ibid., 3]
Lotrionte (2015) provide a different perspective regarding the proliferation of cyber espionage. Even though the proliferation is attributable to the transformation of conventional surveillance and espionage, there are additional contributing factors. According to Lotrionte (2015), cyber espionage, particularly economic espionage is brought by the failure by international law to provide public order.[footnoteRef:5] Prescriptive norms of international law are not strong enough to provide public order that would deter cyber espionage, especially economic espionage. Similarly, Libicki (2017) contends that despite objections to certain types of cyber espionage by the United States, such practices are rampant due to lack of suitable and effective norms.[footnoteRef:6] The absence of such norms or policies contribute to the widespread use of cyber espionage to promote cyberattacks on a nation’s critical infrastructure. [5: Catherine Lotrionte, “Countering State-Sponsored Cyber Economic Espionage Under International Law”, North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation 40, (2015):445] [6: Martin Libicki, “The Coming of Cyber Espionage Norms”, 9th International Conference on Cyber Conflict, 2017. https://ccdcoe.org/uploads/2018/10/Art-01-The-Coming-of-Cyber-Espionage-Norms.pdf]
Jasper (2015) contends that the spread and increase of cyber espionage in the modern world is attributable to the struggle for control of world affairs. This struggle incorporates efforts by different stakeholders including criminals, hackers, terrorists, virtual states and foreign powers.[footnoteRef:7] Foreign powers are employing similar tactics as criminals by carrying out malicious activities to intercept communication in computer systems and networks. The digital battlefield has become intense as nations try to intercept communications of their adversaries. For example, China has hacked every big American company looking for useful information as well as the computer systems of private transportation firms working for the U.S. Army. [7: Scott Jasper, “Deterring Malicious Behavior in Cyberspace”, Strategic Studies Quarterly 9, no. 1 (2015):60]
Cyber Espionage as an Acceptable State Behavior
According to Libicki (2017), there is a proposition that cyber espionage is an acceptable state behavior in the modern international framework. Based on this proposition, there have been calls for the establishment of norms in international law to promote the use of cyber espionage as an intelligence gathering strategy. Proponents of this idea contend that cyber espionage can be used as a new strategy for traditional intelligence gathering purposes and national security decision-making. This proposition is questionable because cyber espionage is a form of cyber espionage, which is deemed unacceptable.[footnoteRef:8] This proposition comes at a time when the United States has rejected some forms of cyber espionage activities such as China’s financially motivated cyber espionage and the Russian doxing attacks. [8: Ibid., 6]
Hjortdal (2011) states that over the past few years, China has shown greater interest in cyberspace offensively unlike other state actors. Cyber espionage i.e. espionage to gain military knowledge is one of the three strategies employed by China to ascend in the international system. This has continued to generate concerns as China uses cyber espionage to spy on and deter the United States.[footnoteRef:9] The National Counterintelligence and Security Center (2018) reports that cyber espionage poses significant threats to the security, prosperity and competitive advantage of the United States.[footnoteRef:10] As a result, cyber espionage affects the political and economic relationships between countries while changing the modern warfare landscape.[footnoteRef:11] Therefore, China’s increased use of cyber espionage against the United States could pose threats to US homeland security as well as the political and economic relations between the two countries. [9: Ibid., 1] [10: National Counterintelligence and Security Center, “Foreign Economic Espionage in Cyberspace”, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, 2018. https://www.dni.gov/files/NCSC/documents/news/20180724-economic-espionage-pub.pdf] [11: Dana Rubenstein, “Nation State Cyber Espionage and its Impacts”, Washington University in St. Louis, 2014. https://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse571-14/ftp/cyber_espionage/]
Libicki (2017) stated that despite these threats, cyber espionage should be an acceptable state behavior, but with specific norms.[footnoteRef:12] Norms should be established to ensure that the results of cyber espionage are used for traditional intelligence purposes and national security decisions. In addition, use of the results of cyber espionage for cyberattack on critical infrastructure should be prohibited. Georgieva concurs by stating that intelligence agencies should collaborate to generate norms to guide cyber espionage for the international community.[footnoteRef:13] In concurrence, Kessler (2017) argues that the United States has led efforts toward establishing norms to acceptability of cyber espionage through gathering several Groups of Government Experts.[footnoteRef:14] These groups are mandated with the responsibility of giving report on how information and communication technology impacts national security. Through the reports, the United States and other nations in the international community would determine how to address cybersecurity, particularly on dealing with cyber espionage. This is critical because cybersecurity continues to be a constant and growing problem/challenge as criminals and foreign powers use stolen data obtained through cyber espionage.[footnoteRef:15] [12: Ibid., 4.] [13: Ilina Georgieva, “The Unexpected Norm-Setters: Intelligence Agencies in Cyberspace”, Contemporary Security Policy (2019):1] [14: Sam Kessler, “Cyberespionage, and the Need for Norms”, Harvard Political Review, 2017. https://harvardpolitics.com/online/cyberespionage-need-norms/] [15: Lillian Ablon, “Data Thieves: The Motivations of Cyber Threat Actors and Their Use and Monetization of Stolen Data”, RAND Corporation, 2018. https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/testimonies/CT400/CT490/RAND_CT490.pdf]
Additionally, Brown (2017) contends that state accept cyber espionage as part of international relations. This acceptance has contributed to general tolerance of cyber espionage as it helps to obtain huge volumes of data or information in or transmitted through computer systems/networks.[footnoteRef:16] However, the international legal system has failed to distinguish cyber activities in relation to cyber espionage. Consequently, cyber espionage activities are neither legal or illegal in international law because of the absence of clear norms. [16: Gary Brown, “Spying and Fighting in Cyberspace: What is Which?” Journal of National Security Law & Policy 8, (2017):621.]
Weissbrodt (2013) seemingly rejects this proposition by contending that cyber espionage generates new threats to national security operations and should be prohibited.[footnoteRef:17] Countries like the United States should focus on addressing flaws in existing legal structures that promote cyber espionage in order to deal with the threat posed by computer systems and network operations. Smith (2018) supports this view by arguing that international law cannot meaningfully differentiate between economic espionage and cyber espionage for national security reasons.[footnoteRef:18] Therefore, the proposition that establishing norms in international law to define acceptable cyber espionage is wrong because international law may not fully distinguish between cyber espionage for intelligence gathering/national security and economic espionage. According to Yoo (2015), recent incidents of cyber espionage have demonstrated that it can inflict significant damage to the cyber infrastructure of another state when used as an armed attack.[footnoteRef:19] Therefore, efforts to establish norms in international law to determine acceptability of cyber espionage could be counter-productive as it is likely to be used for cyberattacks. [17: David Weissbrodt, “Cyber-Conflict, Cyber-Crime, and Cyber-Espionage”, Minnesota Journal of International Law 22, no. 2 (2013):348.] [18: Jessica Malekos Smith, “The Cyber Espionage Predominant Purpose Test”, Small Wars Journal, 2018. https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/the-cyber-espionage-predominant-purpose-test] [19: Christopher S. Yoo, “Cyber Espionage or Cyberwar?: International Law, Domestic Law, and Self-Protective Measures”, University of Pennsylvania Law School, 2015. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2541&context=faculty_scholarship]
Gap in Existing Literature
As shown in the literature review, existing literature provides divergent perspectives on acceptability of cyber espionage as an intelligence gathering framework. Existing studies seemingly focus on the establishment of norms to define acceptable cyber espionage by governments. These studies do not explicitly state whether or not cyber espionage should be deemed an acceptable state behavior. Some of these studies explain the concept issue of cyber espionage as an acceptable state behavior based on its probable benefits to intelligence gathering and national security purposes. On the other hand, some studies cite the lack of norms in international law as the premise for rejecting the proposition that cyber espionage should be deemed an acceptable state behavior. Therefore, these studies fail to agree on this issue and provide contradictory opinions on acceptability of cyber espionage as an intelligence gathering framework or tool. Additionally, these studies do not explicitly address how cyber espionage is an acceptable state behavior for intelligence gathering despite being a form of cyberattack. Consequently, there is a gap in literature on whether or not cyber espionage should be regarded as an acceptable new intelligence gathering approach.
This study seeks to address these gaps in existing literature through the use of the Just War Theory, which addresses justifications of why and how wars are fought. The theory has played a major role in assessment and understanding the moral and ethical use of new weapons and can be applied to cyberspace with respect to cyber warfare.[footnoteRef:20] Using this theory, the acceptability of cyber espionage as an intelligence gathering tool was examined on the context that it is a form of ethically and legally unacceptable cyberattack. The Just War Theory was applied in the analysis to understand the implications of accepting cyber espionage as a state behavior for intelligence gathering in relation to cyberattacks. [20: Joel A. Yates, “Cyber Warfare: An Evolution in Warfare not Just War Theory”, Marine Corps University, 2013. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a601701.pdf]
Using this theory, the gap in existing literature was addressed based on acceptable justifications of why and how cyber wars are fought. The justifications were in turn be the premise for determining the acceptability of cyber espionage as an acceptable state behavior for intelligence gathering purposes and national security decision-making. In the analysis, the research focused on examining whether cyber espionage is legally and morally justified to be an acceptable state behavior in relation to the Just War Theory. During this process, factors that contribute to the proposition that cyber espionage is an acceptable state behavior were critically analyzed. These factors were analyzed on the context of the unacceptability of cyberattack, which is primarily the basis of cyber espionage.
Research Design/Methodology
The researcher will explore the issue and answer the research question through conducting a qualitative case study. Case study is an approach to qualitative study that involves evaluation of complex phenomenon in its context.[footnoteRef:21] It can be explanatory or exploratory as it entails a deep understanding through various sources of data. For this study, the researcher adopted an exploratory approach to qualitative case study to gain a deeper understanding of the acceptability of cyber espionage. The focus of case study research ranges from a specific community or organization to a set of documents.[footnoteRef:22] When employed in a dissertation, qualitative case study approach is centered on empirical curiosity and practical research. Given the nature of the research issue and the researcher’s current situation, a set of documents was used as the focus of this qualitative case study research on cyber espionage. [21: Pamela Baxter & Susan Jack, “Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers”, The Qualitative Report 13, no. 4 (2008):544] [22: The Higher Education Academy, “Methodologies”, Sheffield Hallam University, 2019. http://www.socscidiss.bham.ac.uk/methodologies.html]

Data Collection
The focus of this qualitative case study research was a set of documents on the issue of cyber espionage. This implies that the researcher focused on identifying and examining existing documents or cases on this topic. Therefore, secondary data was the premise for examining the research issue and answering the research questions. The researcher opted to collect secondary data, which is data collected by another researcher, because of time and financial constraints.[footnoteRef:23] In this regard, the researcher explored this research issue without going through the process of collecting primary data in the field. [23: Ibid., 22]
To identify a suitable set of documents for the study, the researcher conducted a search on three electronic databases i.e. Google Scholar, Emerald Insights and EBSCOHost. The search was carried out using several keywords and phrases including “cyber espionage”, “cyberattack”, “cyber espionage as an acceptable state behavior”, “dangers of cyber espionage”, “acceptability of cyber espionage”, “China’s cyber espionage”, “Russia’s cyber espionage” and “cyber espionage in the United States.” The search produced 1802 documents, which were then analyzed using inclusion and exclusion criteria. During this process, 673 duplicates, 46 abstracts, and 224 articles published in other languages except English were eliminated. Studies published within the last five years and those based on primary data were identified. Through this, the researcher identified 11 articles that were included in the literature review and analyzed to answer the research question.
Data Analysis
As shown in the data collection, the researcher collected secondary data on the issue of cyber espionage. Data obtained from these publications was analyzed through thematic analysis. Thematic analysis is a data analysis technique commonly used in qualitative studies to identify emerging themes and patters in data, which are then used to answer the research question. In essence, the researcher examined existing data to identify emerging themes/patterns that help answer the research question. Using this data analysis technique, the existing themes or patterns are primarily regularities in data that help address the research issue.[footnoteRef:24] [24: John W. Creswell, Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 4th ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.).]
Potential Data Limitations and Biases
Some of the potential data limitations and biases in this study include focus on studies published in English language only and selection bias. These limitations and biases were mitigated through following the process of a qualitative case study research.
Analysis and Findings
As previously mentioned, data identified in the selected set of studies in the literature review was analyzed using thematic analysis. The analysis process entailed identification of emerging theoretical and empirical themes in existing data. Analysis of existing data in relation to the research issue was carried out through a series of questions that guided the research and helped to answer the research issue. Some of the questions used in the analysis process include: What is cyber espionage? What is the link between cyber espionage and cyberattack? Why has cyber espionage become a major issue in international relations and geopolitics? Why is cyber espionage considered an acceptable state behavior though it is a form of cyberattack? What are some of the existing norms that promote acceptability of cyber espionage? What is the impact of these norms on the acceptability of cyber espionage as a state behavior for intelligence collection or gathering?
Using these questions in the thematic analysis process, the study generated significant findings or results on the issue of acceptability of cyber espionage as a state behavior on intelligence gathering. These insights were obtained in the form of emerging themes or patterns in existing data as follows:
Theme #1: Cyber espionage is a key component of cyber warfare
One of the emerging themes or patterns in existing data on this issue is that cyber espionage is a key component of cyber warfare. As rapid technological advancements have ushered today’s information age, nation-states have started to engage in information or cyber warfare. The impact of technology on modern communications has contributed to the need for nation-states to enhance cyber security. Since the cyberspace provides an avenue to adversaries to enhance their capabilities for attacks, nation-states consider cyber security as an important component toward enhancing the safety of their people and property as well as enhancing homeland security. Consequently, cyber defense and cyber security have emerged as two priority areas for defense strategies adopted by nation-states across the globe.[footnoteRef:25] Countries like the United States, China and Russia have incorporated cyber warfare into their war doctrine.[footnoteRef:26] A critical component toward enhancing cyber warfare capabilities of any nation-state is intelligence gathering. This has contributed to the emergence and proliferation of cyber espionage that has shifted intelligence gathering to the online space even as global warfare has evolved to include cyberspace. Nations like China, the United States and Russia are the most prolific and most advanced cyber spies and continue to commit cyber espionage to help enhance their cyber warfare capabilities. [25: Diplomacy Data, “Cyber Security and Cyber Espionage in International Relations”, Diplomacy Data, 2015. http://diplomacydata.com/cyber-security-and-cyber-espionage-in-international-relations/] [26: Ibid., 1]
Existing literature shows that cyber espionage is one of the protocols and procedures of cyber warfare since it plays a crucial role in intelligence gathering. Through cyber espionage, nation-states increase their expenditure toward securing critical infrastructure that could be vulnerable to cyber-attacks. For example, the United States has increased governmental expenditure on cyber warfare including cyber espionage since 2002 in order to enhance its cyber security. On the other hand, China has continued to use cyber espionage as a critical part of its cyber warfare and security. China’s increased development of cyber warfare capabilities and increased cyber espionage activities are based on the realization that realization of adequate defense and security is impossible without adopting new forms of war brought by technology.[footnoteRef:27] Conflicts between nation-states such as the conflict between the United States and China provide justification for incorporating cyber espionage in cyber warfare as a means of ensuring cybersecurity.[footnoteRef:28] China’s use of cyber espionage is to enhance its cyber capabilities while the U.S. utilizes cyber espionage to protect against potential threats to its critical infrastructure and the mutual risk of strategic misunderstanding. [27: Lyu Jinghua, “What Are China’s Cyber Capabilities and Intentions”, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2019. https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/04/01/what-are-china-s-cyber-capabilities-and-intentions-pub-78734] [28: Jack Deoliveira, “SWJ Primer: Chinese Cyber Espionage and Information Warfare”, Small Wars Journal, 2019. https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/swj-primer-chinese-cyber-espionage-and-information-warfare]

Theme #2: Cyber espionage provides a framework for appropriate countermeasures
The second emerging theme in data is the idea that cyber espionage provides a suitable framework for appropriate countermeasures to cyberattacks.[footnoteRef:29] As shown in the example of China and the United, cyber espionage provides a tool for nation-states to develop suitable mechanisms that can be used to address any potential threats to cyber security. Over the past few years, China has focused on establishing appropriate countermeasures to potential cyberattacks through creating a specific cyber intelligence division in its intelligence department. This division has the capability of advanced surveillance as well as ability to attack critical infrastructures of its adversaries such as electricity and water systems. The United States warfare doctrine incorporates cyber espionage as a tool for safeguarding its critical infrastructure. In addition, the US has incorporated appropriate countermeasures to cyberattacks and other potential threats in the cyberspace through an elaborate cyber espionage strategy. Similar to China, Russia has established a cyber espionage unit that collects intelligence and help in establishment of appropriate countermeasures to any threats in the nation’s cyberspace. However, Russia utilizes the cyber espionage unit to collect intelligence that is used for offensive cyber warfare. For example, Russia recently hacked Iranian hackers to conduct attacks in over 35 countries.[footnoteRef:30] [29: Ibid., 1.] [30: Helen Warrell & Henry Foy, “Russian Cyberattack Unit ‘masqueraded’ as Iranian Hackers, UK Says”, Financial Times, 2019. https://www.ft.com/content/b947b46a-f342-11e9-a79c-bc9acae3b654]
Theme #3: Cyber espionage enhances intelligence gathering
The third emerging theme or pattern in data is the idea that cyber espionage enhances intelligence gathering capabilities of nation-states. Improvements in intelligence gathering is linked to the changing nature of modern warfare because of technological advancements. In Russia’s case, cyber espionage provides a framework for the nation to enhance its intelligence gathering, which in turn aids its offensive cyber warfare.[footnoteRef:31] Intelligence collected using cyber espionage is used to foster offensive and defensive cyber capabilities of nation-states. For China, the United States and other nation-states, the shift in modern warfare to incorporate cyberspace has necessitated adopting strategies that enhance intelligence gathering and cyber capabilities. Cyber espionage has provided a framework for nation-states to improve their cyber and modern warfare capabilities through enhanced intelligence gathering. [31: Michael Connell & Sarah Vogler, “Russia’s Approach to Cyber Warfare”, CNA Analysis and Solutions, 2017. https://www.cna.org/CNA_files/PDF/DOP-2016-U-014231-1Rev.pdf]
Probable Errors in Analysis or Decision-making
As shown in the analysis, existing data provides explanations for the acceptability of cyber espionage as a state behavior based on three major themes or patterns. These themes show that while cyber espionage is viewed as a form of cyberattacks, it is an acceptable state behavior because it plays a key role in cyber warfare, improves intelligence gathering capabilities, and helps to establish appropriate countermeasures. While these themes help to answer the research question, the employed research methodology and design could have included errors in analysis or decision-making. The qualitative case study design could result in errors in analysis or decision-making since it is based on secondary data. The lack of empirical research and primary data implies that the decision-making could have been erroneous and resulted in wrong conclusions because of biases in existing studies.
Conclusion
Cyber espionage has become a major and complex international problem in today’s world. Even though a proposition for cyber espionage to be viewed as an acceptable state behavior exists, the practice poses significant national security risks and threats. This qualitative case study research examined existing data on this issue based on a set of documents. Data obtained from these set of existing documents was analyzed using thematic analysis technique in which emerging themes and patterns were identified. The study demonstrates that cyber espionage is an acceptable state behavior because it plays a key role in cyber warfare, improves intelligence gathering capabilities, and helps to establish appropriate countermeasures against cyberattacks and potential threats in cyberspace. Through these findings, the study addresses the existing gap in literature on acceptability of cyber espionage and provides insights on the reasons for establishment of cyber espionage norms in international relations.
However, the study’s findings are based on secondary research since it employed qualitative case study design. The lack of empirical data to support the broader themes or patterns identified in existing literature could have negative impacts on the generalizability of these study’s findings. While the research issue emerges from empirical curiosity, the employed research design/approach does not fully examine the issue. Therefore, future studies should be conducted to further explore the topic and help enhance understanding of cyber espionage. One of the recommendations for future research is to incorporate empirical or primary data on the topic. While qualitative methodology could still be suitable, primary data should be collected and analyzed to help improve understanding of the topic. Secondly, future research should incorporate a different data analysis technique in order to generate findings or results that can be generalized.
Bibliography
Ablon, L. “Data Thieves: The Motivations of Cyber Threat Actors and Their Use and Monetization of Stolen Data.” RAND Corporation, March 2018. https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/testimonies/CT400/CT490/RAND_CT490.pdf
Agarwal A. & CERT-IN. “Cyber Espionage, Infiltration and Combating Techniques.” Indian Computer Emergency Response Team, 2013. https://www.cert-in.org.in/Downloader?pageid=5&type=2&fileName=CIPS-2013-0128.pdf
Banks, W.C. “Cyber Espionage and Electronic Surveillance: Beyond the Media Coverage.” Emory law Journal 66, (2017).
Baxter, P. & Jack, S. “Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers.” The Qualitative Report 13, no. 4 (2008).
Brown, G. “Spying and Fighting in Cyberspace: What is Which?” Journal of National Security Law & Policy 8, (2017).
Connell, M. & Vogler, S. “Russia’s Approach to Cyber Warfare.” CNA Analysis and Solutions, 2017. https://www.cna.org/CNA_files/PDF/DOP-2016-U-014231-1Rev.pdf
Creswell, J.W. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Diplomacy Data. “Cyber Security and Cyber Espionage in International Relations.” Diplomacy Data, 2015. http://diplomacydata.com/cyber-security-and-cyber-espionage-in-international-relations/
Deoliveira, J. “SWJ Primer: Chinese Cyber Espionage and Information Warfare.” Small Wars Journal, 2019. https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/swj-primer-chinese-cyber-espionage-and-information-warfare
Georgieva, I. “The Unexpected Norm-Setters: Intelligence Agencies in Cyberspace.” Contemporary Security Policy (2019).
Hjortdal, M. “China’s Use of Cyber Warfare: Espionage Meets Strategic Deterrence.” Journal of Strategic Security 4, no. 2 (2011).
Jasper, S. “Deterring Malicious Behavior in Cyberspace.” Strategic Studies Quarterly 9, no. 1 (2015).
Jinghua, L. “What Are China’s Cyber Capabilities and Intentions.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2019. https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/04/01/what-are-china-s-cyber-capabilities-and-intentions-pub-78734
Kessler, S. “Cyberespionage, and the Need for Norms.” Harvard Political Review, March 2017. https://harvardpolitics.com/online/cyberespionage-need-norms/
Libicki, M. “The Coming of Cyber Espionage Norms.” 9th International Conference on Cyber Conflict, 2017. https://ccdcoe.org/uploads/2018/10/Art-01-The-Coming-of-Cyber-Espionage-Norms.pdf
Lotrionte, C. “Countering State-Sponsored Cyber Economic Espionage Under International Law.” North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation 40, (2015).
National Counterintelligence and Security Center. “Foreign Economic Espionage in Cyberspace.” Office of the Director of National Intelligence, 2018. https://www.dni.gov/files/NCSC/documents/news/20180724-economic-espionage-pub.pdf
Rubenstein, D. “Nation State Cyber Espionage and its Impacts.” Washington University in St. Louis, December 2014. https://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse571-14/ftp/cyber_espionage/
Smith, J.M. “The Cyber Espionage Predominant Purpose Test.” Small Wars Journal, 2018. https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/the-cyber-espionage-predominant-purpose-test
The Higher Education Academy. “Methodologies.” Sheffield Hallam University, 2019. http://www.socscidiss.bham.ac.uk/methodologies.html
Warrell, H. & Foy, H. “Russian Cyberattack Unit ‘masqueraded’ as Iranian Hackers, UK Says.” Financial Times, 2019. https://www.ft.com/content/b947b46a-f342-11e9-a79c-bc9acae3b654
Weissbrodt, D. “Cyber-Conflict, Cyber-Crime, and Cyber-Espionage.” Minnesota Journal of International Law 22, no. 2 (2013).
Yates, J.A. “Cyber Warfare: An Evolution in Warfare not Just War Theory.” Marine Corps University, April 2013. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a601701.pdf
Yoo, C.S. “Cyber Espionage or Cyberwar?: International Law, Domestic Law, and Self-Protective Measures.” University of Pennsylvania Law School, 2015. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2541&context=faculty_scholarship