The topography of cyberspace and its consequences for operations

For all the focus on cyberspace as a source of security threats and a domain of military operations, there has been little progress on establishing a consistent approach to describing what constitutes cyberspace. Dozens of definitions of the term "cyberspace" have been developed, but consensus on its essential attributes has yet to be achieved. Similarly, a number of different models have been offered to describe cyberspace in terms of layers, such as the physical, logical and cyber persona layers used in US Joint Publication 3-12, Cyberspace Operations. This paper argues that cyberspace as a label for a domain should not be confused with the individual networks - some interconnected ("open") and some relatively isolated ("closed") - involved in military operations. As illustrated by the STEADFAST COBALT exercise, military operations often involve a complex set of networks. The paper then uses the example of the Internet to illustrate the need to take a topographical approach - one that identifies the features of the objects or entities and their structural relationships - to enable effective military operations. This more detailed topographical view of the Internet is used to illustrate how cyberspace considerations relate to existing operational doctrine such as concepts from the operational environment (Joint Operational Area and Area of Interest). Some considerations fit well within this framework. Others require some adaptation, such as shifting some responsibilities to a centralized and persistent function such as the Cyberspace Operations Centre (CyOC) being established by NATO. Others fall outside military control and are better addressed through civil-military cooperation. This example also illustrates how precision in describing the composition of cyberspace is essential if military operations in and through cyberspace are to develop into a mature discipline with a solid base of concepts, terminology, techniques, tactics and procedures.