What Is the Cyber Offense-Defense Balance? Conceptions, Causes, and Assessment
Abstract
Most scholars and policymakers claim that cyberspace favors the offense; a minority of scholars disagree. Sweeping claims about the offense-defense balance in cyberspace are misguided because the balance can be assessed only with respect to specific organizational skills and technologies. The balance is defined in dyadic terms, that is, the value less the costs of offensive operations and the value less the costs of defensive operations. The costs of cyber operations are shaped primarily by the organizational skills needed to create and manage complex information technology efficiently. The current success of offense results primarily from poor defensive management and the relatively simpler goals of offense; it can be very costly to exert precise physical effects using cyberweapons. An empirical analysis shows that the Stuxnet cyberattacks on Iran's nuclear facilities very likely cost the offense much more than the defense. The perceived benefits of both the Stuxnet offense and defense, moreover, were likely two orders of magnitude greater than the perceived costs, making it unlikely that decisionmakers focused on costs.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The newness of the cyber domain relative to land or sea means that scholars and policy makers lack deep historical knowledge and a clear set of analogies to shape how they think about the consequences of cyber activities.
“First, the newness of the cyber domain relative to, say, land or sea means that scholars and policy makers lack deep historical knowledge and a clear set of analogies to shape how they think about the consequences of cyber activities (Slayton 2017).”
From Do Emerging Military Technologies Matter for International Politics? (2020) · cites this paper as Slayton 2017
Cites
The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.398 · Cited by 4,957 · see citing works
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600 · Cited by 4,760 · see citing works
Rid, T. (2012) · Journal of Strategic Studies · doi:10.1080/01402390.2011.608939 · Cited by 716 · see citing works
Digital Disaster, Cyber Security, and the Copenhagen School
Hansen, L., & Nissenbaum, H. (2009) · International Studies Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2478.2009.00572.x · Cited by 530 · see citing works
Weaving Tangled Webs: Offense, Defense, and Deception in Cyberspace
Gartzke, E., & Lindsay, J. R. (2015) · Security Studies · doi:10.1080/09636412.2015.1038188 · Cited by 287 · see citing works
The Impact of China on Cybersecurity: Fiction and Friction
Lindsay, J. R. (2015) · International Security · doi:10.1162/isec_a_00189 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion
Farrell, H., & Newman, A. L. (2019) · International Security · doi:10.1162/isec_a_00351 · Cited by 1,879 · see citing works
Do Emerging Military Technologies Matter for International Politics?
Horowitz, M. C. (2020) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-050718-032725 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
“S ee c op yr ig ht f or a pp ro ve d us e. to abilities like scanning, managing network access, updating software, and effectively operating complex cyber systems in a world of uncertainty (Slayton 2017).”
Background
- Authors
- Slayton, R.
- Affiliations
- Cornell University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Slayton, Rebecca
- ORCID
- Slayton, Rebecca
- Venue
- International Security
- Publisher
- MIT Press
- Published
- 2017-01
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 72-109
- ISSN
- 0162-2889 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-4804
- OpenAlex
- W2585166575
- Cited by
- 224
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 73.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Security (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Keywords
- cyber warfare, cyberattacks, Stuxnet, cyber weapons, nuclear facilities, Iranian nuclear program, cyber deterrence
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review