New Technologies in International Law / Tymofeyeva, Crhák et al.

for responding to the behaviour of states that may be a manifestation of cyber attacks. 699 It is intended to return to the topic of responses in the form of sanctions to violence in cyberspace later in the paper. We need to agree with the Sylwester Gardocki and Joanna Wrona who said that: ‘Assigning responsibility for a traditional armed attack is relatively easy, while in the case of the use of cyberspace it is very difficult and sometimes impossible. Virtual space offers aggressors the opportunity to cover their tracks and exploit the IT infrastructure of a of a third party. Countries blamed for an attack often distance themselves from the hacking group that carried out the operation, denying any association’. 700 That is the reason why cyber attacks are still one of the most difficult to catch and describe type of agression. Therefore they seem to be worth analysing from the scientific point of view. However, we can still point to some regulations that are associated with the cyberatacks and the hybrid war. First of all, the attention should be drawn to the the provisions of the UN Charter. Indeed, these provisions are binding when it comes to Russia. For instance, Agata Małecka mentioned that ‘the UN Charter, that in Article 51 is act-based, does not include cyber-operations, because they do not generate negative effects by release of kinetic force. However, it should be considered that the intention of the drafters of Charter was to avoid certain effects, that is, to discourage states from initi-ating armed attacks, which consequences for the affected states were severe enough to respond militarily as well. This consequences-based approach means that all cyber- -operations with effects analogous to those caused by kinetic actions consideredas an armed attack will also be treated as an armed attack’. 701 Moreover, in her article there is a reference to the prohibition of the use of force in in ternational relations, which is based on Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. This regulations should be also taken into consideration when it comes to the potential cyberconflict. Sven Herpig from the German foundation named Stiftung Neue VerantwortungIf who specialises in cyber issues claimed that the effects of a cyber operation were equiva lent to an armed forces operation, then the cyber operation would also result in a vio lation of Article 5 of the UN Charter. 702 In his opinion, the means used do not matter, only the effect counts. It needs to be mentioned that one of the most important international acts re lating to crimes committed in cyberspace is the Convention on Cybercrime of 23 November 2001. Despite this title, the doctrine points out a huge defect as to the content, which refers primarily to common crimes without addressing espionage or cyber military activities. 703 699 Gardocki S, Wrona J, ‘Russia’s use of cyberspace in hybrid conflicts in the light of Russian cyber security policy’ (2020) 2(38) Colloquium 33. 700 Ibid. 701 Małecka A, ‘Cyber operations under international law’ (2022) 3(47) Colloquium 149. 702 Taube F, ‘Wojna w Ukrainie. Szczególna rola cyberataków’ ( DW , 1 March 2022) accessed 16 December 2023. 703 Gardocki S, Wrona J, ‘Russia’s use of cyberspace in hybrid conflicts in the light of Russian cyber security policy’ (2020) 2(38) Colloquium 33.

171