I agree with @RidT, but it has been illuminating to me how strong the divide is between natsec/policy types and infosec practitioners on this issue. https://twitter.com/RidT/status/1338537697560965120
Why is this important? Infosec practitioners use militarized terms like attack surface or cyber attack to convey the importance of these ops (polemic), but these terms have definitions w/in military doctrine or intl/domestic law tied to legal authorities for use of force.
Scholars like me are constantly asking journalists to use doctrinal/legal terms in order to decrease pressure for violent retaliation to cyber intelligence. Its not that we don't think these hacks are important, but that these terms have negative effects on security policies.
You can follow @JackieGSchneid.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
Those who think consciousness raising & movement building are disconnected, or even a distraction from electoral politics have not paid attention to the history of social change.In this thread, we
Read more
The 2020s will be known as the Remote Work decadeA few predictions of what is likely to emerge[ a thread ] Third Space: Office and Working from Home will
Read more
1/29: Have you ever had a concept explained to you that helps frame complex issues you’ve been wrestling with and opens your eyes to new possibilities? A concept that I
Read more
By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.