Cited by 224Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare StudiesInformation and Cyber SecurityInternational Relations and Foreign Policy

What Is the Cyber Offense-Defense Balance? Conceptions, Causes, and Assessment

Slayton, Rebecca·2017·International Security

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

Crossref · 10.1162/isec_a_00267

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Slayton, R.
Affiliations
Cornell University (US)
Corresponding author
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