Herein lies one of the political implications of cyber-warfare. Because cyber-warfare is trans-national, global efforts to prevent cyber crimes must be global in scope and cooperative in nature. Nations do have information warfare capabilities that can be harnessed preemptively as well as defensively (Knapp & Bolton 2006). However, to harness the capabilities of state-sponsored cyber warfare tools, the norms of neutrality need to be rewritten (Kelsey 2008). Finally, the social impacts of cyber-warfare are in many ways similar to the impacts of terrorism. The nebulous fear from unidentifiable non-state actors has a tremendous impact on social life and how individuals use information technology. Consumers are concerned about the protection of private data, such as banking information. Cyber-warfare can potentially dismantle entire organizations, and disrupt essential services. Given the push to digitalize medical records, the health of human beings is also at stake.

Cyber-warfare offers potential for new and innovative...

Law enforcement responses to cyber-warfare will be among the most critical within localized jurisdictions, whereas trans-state responses to cyber-warfare will require the cooperation of multiple organizations. This makes responses to cyber-warfare politically tricky and potentially problematic. Combatting trans-state cyber-warfare requires also the cooperation of the private sector too. The private and public sectors must collaborate on creative ways of harnessing the power of information technology in cyber-warfare in order to protect the end user.
References

Kelsey, J.T.G. (2008). Note: Hacking into international humanitarian law: The principles of distinction and neutrality in the age of cyber warfare. Michigan Law Review.

Knapp, K.J. & Boulton, W.R. (2006). Cyber-warfare threatens corporations: expansion into commercial environments. ISM Journal.

Wik, M.W. (n.d.). Revolution in information affairs.