Outer Space, the Final Frontier of Cyberspace: Regulating Cybersecurity Issues in Two Interwoven Domains

ABSTRACT

In the last decades, space activities have become more automated and digitized due to the technological development. As such, it is crucial to consider cyberspace and its risks to guarantee safety, security, and long-term sustainability of space activities, as well as to ensure that activities in outer space are carried out for the benefit of humankind. The paper assumes that both areas are global commons and numerous interactions exist between them, notably in terms of cybersecurity. Indeed, there is an increasing risk of attack against satellites, including interferences, jamming, and hacking, which reveals that the security aspects of satellite systems and data transmission cannot be overlooked, and the risk of cyberwarfare is real. Cybersecurity regulations at international, regional, and national levels to determine the potential elements applicable to space activities are examined in this paper. The paper stresses the need to bring together actors involved in the domain of cyber and in space activities with the aim to implement a structured, appropriated, and responsive regulatory framework to cyberthreats by considering the interdependence between these two areas. In this regard, it is argued that a compartmentalized approach with relation to cyber and outer space should be avoided.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Kai-Uwe Schrogl, Which Future for the “Global Commons”?, in Proceeding of the International Institute of Space Law 2018, ed. P.J. Blount, Tanja Masson-Zwaan, Rafael Moro-Aguilar, Kai-Uwe Schrogl (The Hague, 2019), 935–42.

2. Mark Barrett, Dick Bedford, Elizabeth Skinner, Eva Vergles, “Assured Access to the Global Commons”, NATO Final Report, Norfolk, Virginia USA, 3 April 2011, 9: https://www.act.nato.int/images/stories/events/2010/gc/aagc_finalreport.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021); Surabhi Ranganathan, “Global Commons”, EJIL 27, 3 (2016): 693–717.

3. Thematic Think Piece, UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda, Global Governance and Governance of the Global Commons in the Global Partnership for Development Beyond 2015, January 2013, 3–6: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/untaskteam_undf/thinkpieces/24_thinkpiece_global_governance.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021).

4. Paul Meyer, Outer Space and Cyberspace: A Tale of Two Security Realms, Simons Papers in Security and Development, No. 51/2016, School for International Studies, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, April 2016, 1–21; on the perspective on outer space as a global commons, see also Daniel Patton, ”Is Space a Global Commons?”, Secure World Foundation, Space Sustainability Briefs (2022) 2–3.

5. See generally John J. Klein, Understanding Space Strategy, The Art of War in Space (Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2019).

6. See Dan Jerker B. Svantesson, “The New Phenomenon of Cyber Law”, in Air Law, Space Law, Cyber Law – the Institute of Air and Space Law at Age 90, ed. Stephan Hobe (Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 2016), 123–135.

7. Definition from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, US Department of Commerce: https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/cyberspace (accessed May 12, 2021); see also George K. Kostopoulos, Cyberspace and Cybersecurity, 2^nd. (New York: CRC Press), 2020.

8. Definition of “outer space”, Cambridge Dictionary: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/outer-space (accessed February 27, 2023).

9. Olavo de O. Bittencourt Neto, ”Revisiting the Delimitation of Outer Space in Light of the Long-Term Sustainability of Space Activities,” Air&Space Law 48 (2023): 93–112; Tanja Masson-Zwaan, Mahulena Hofmann, Introduction to Space Law, (The Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer, 2019), 12–13; see also the work undertaken within the COPUOS and the Working Group on Definition and Delimitation of Outer Space of the Legal Subcommittee: https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/copuos/lsc/ddos/index.html (accessed March 27, 2023).

10. Francis Lyall, Paul B. Larsen, Space Law A Treatise, (Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2018), 135 ss; Frans von Der Dunk, Fabion Tronchetti (eds), Handbook of Space Law (Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, USA, Elgar: 2015), 60–72.

11. Australian Space Activities Amendment (Launched and Returns) Act 2018 (24 Section 8 – Definition of launch) ; Danish Act on Activities in Outer Space (No 409 of 11 May 2016), Art. 4.

12. See Du Li, “Cyber-attacks on Space Activities: Revisiting the Responsibility Regime of Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty”, Space Policy, 63 (2023) (http://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2022.101522); Dimitrios Delibasis, “Cybersecurity and State Responsibility : Identifying a Due Diligence Standard for Prevention of Transboundary Threats”, in Cybersecurity and Human Rights in the Age of Cyberveillance, ed. Joanna Kulesza, Roy Balleste, (Lanham : Rowman&Littlefield, 2016), 17–37.

13. Meghan Bartels, Why Satellites Need Cybersecurity Just Like You, Space, 2018: https://www.space.com/42658-cybersecurity-for-satellites.html (accessed May 12, 2021); see Federico Bergamasco, Roberto Cassar, Rada Popova, Benjamyn I. Scott, Cybersecurity, Key Legal Considerations for the Aviation and Space Sectors (The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International), 2020; Frédérick Douzet, “Cyber-Security Challenges”, in Handbook of European Defence Policies and Armed Forces, ed. Hugo Meijer, Marco Wyss, (Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018), 523–542; Nir Kshetri, The Quest to Cyber Superiority: Cybersecurity Regulations, Frameworks, and Strategies of Major Economis, (Cham: Springer, 2016).

14. Olavo de O. Bittencourt Neto, “Outer space as a global commons and the role of space law”, in A Research Agenda for Space Policy, eds. Kai-Uwe Schrogl, Christina Giannopapa, Ntorina Antoni, (Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2021), 1–18; Ivan Angelov, “Global Commons and their Strategic Significance for the European Union and NATO”, International Scientific Journal “Security&Future”, 2 (2018): 67–71.

15. “Beyond National Jurisdiction: Oceans, Polar Regions, Cyberspace and Outer Space”, American Society of International Law: https://www.asil.org/topics/signaturetopics/beyond-national-jurisdiction (accessed May 12, 2021).

16. Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, 1967, 610 U.N.T.S. 205.

17. Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, 12 November 1975, 28 U.S.T.695, 1023 U.N.T.S. 15.

18. Abid A. Adoni, International Law on Cyber Security in the Age of Digital Sovereignty, E-International Relations, 14 March 2020: https://www.e-ir.info/2020/03/14/international-law-on-cyber-security-in-the-age-of-digital-sovereignty/ (accessed June 21, 2021).

19. “Cybersecurity Definition”, National Institute of Standards and Technology: https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/cybersecurity (accessed May 12, 2021).

20. Definition from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology: https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/Cyber_Attack (accessed May 12, 2021).

21. See generally P.J. Blount, Mahulena Hofmann, Space Law in a Networked World (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2023); Jana Robinson, “Prominent Security Risks Stemming from Space Hybrid Operations”, in War and Peace in Outer Space, ed. Cassandra Steer, Matthew Hersch, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021) 229–244; David Livingstone, Patricia Lewis, Space, the Final Frontier for Cybersecurity, Chatham House, 22 September 2016: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2016/09/space-final-frontier-cybersecurity (accessed May 12, 2021).

22. See generally P.J. Blount, Reprogramming the World, Cyberspace and the Geography of Global Order, E-International Relations Publishing, 2019; Will the battle for space happen on the ground?, World Economic Forum, 25 May 2022: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/05/increased-cybersecurity-for-space-based-services/ (accessed February 27, 2023).

23. Gregory Falco, Job One for Space Force: Space Asset Cybersecurity, Cyber Security Project, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, July 2018: https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/files/publication/CSP%20Falco%20Space%20Asset%20-%20FINAL.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021).

24. Jana Robinson, Governance Challenges at the Intersection of Space and Cyber Security, The Space Review, 15 February 2016: https://www.thespacereview.com/article/2923/1 (accessed May 12, 2021).

25. Stefan A. Kaiser, “Comment on Cyber Security”, in Air Law, Space Law, Cyber Law – the Institute of Air and Space Law at Age 90, ed. Stephan Hobe (Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 2016), 137–147.

26. Lyall, Larsen, Space Law A Treatise, 465 ss; Mark Holmes, The Growing Risk of a Major Satellite Cyber Attack, Via Satellite, 15 May 2017: http://interactive.satellitetoday.com/the-growing-risk-of-a-major-satellite-cyber-attack/ (accessed May 12, 2021).

27. La Tribune, Space Forum: la filière spatiale “migre vers une économie de la donnée”, 21 Septembre 2020: https://toulouse.latribune.fr/evenements/2020-09-21/space-forum-la-filiere-spatiale-migre-vers-une-economie-de-la-donnee-857758.html (accessed February 27, 2023).

28. Setsuko Aoki, Identifying the Scope of the Applicable International Law Rules Towards Malicious Cyber Activities Against Space Assets, Proceeding of 61th Colloquium on the Law of the Outer Space of the International Institute for Space Law 2018, (The Hague: Eleven International Publishing, 2019), 687–700. See for instance the following cases: (i) Russia conducted a cyberattack against satellite internet network, Viasat's KA-SAT, disrupting Ukrainian infrastructures. Euronews, Russia led major cyberattack on European broadband network just before Ukraine invasion, says West, 10 May 2022: https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/05/10/west-says-russia-led-major-cyber-attack-on-satellite-broadband-network-just-before-ukraine (accessed March 26, 2023); (ii) China hacked the U.S. NOAA’s information systems. Washington Post, Chinese hack US weather systems, satellite network, 12 November 2014: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/chinese-hack-us-weather-systems-satellite-network/2014/11/12/bef1206a-68e9-11e4-b053-65cea7903f2e_story.html (accessed May 12, 2021); (iii) Iran spoofed the GPS signals to capture a RQ-170 drone used by the CIA. Security Week, Reports Say US Drone Was Hijacked by Iran Through GPS Spoofing, 17 December 2011: https://www.securityweek.com/reports-say-us-drone-was-hijacked-iran-through-gps-spoofing (accessed May 12, 2021); (iv) China affected the operation of the Landsat7 and Terra satellites. The guardian, Chinese hackers suspected of interferin with US satellites, 27 October 2011: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/oct/27/chinese-hacking-us-satellites-suspected (accessed May 12, 2021); (v) Iran jammed Eutelsat satellite. SpaceNews, France Seeks ITU Help to Halt Satellite Signal Jamming by Iran, 8 January 2010,: https://spacenews.com/france-seeks-itu-help-halt-satellite-signal-jamming-iran/ (accessed May 12, 2021); (vi) The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam hijacked an Intelsat satellite. SpaceNews, Intelsat Vows to Stop Piracy by Sri Lanka Separatist Group, 18 April 2007, accessed May 12, 2021: https://spacenews.com/intelsat-vows-stop-piracy-sri-lanka-separatist-group/ (accessed May 12, 2021). See also Jana Robinson, Prominent Security Risks, 235.

29. “Defending Spacecraft in the Cyber Domain”, Center for Space Policy and Strategy, November 2019, 2: https://aerospace.org/sites/default/files/2019–11/Bailey_DefendingSpacecraft_11052019.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021); see “The War in Ukraine from a Space Cybersecurity Perspective”, ESPI Short Report 1, October 2022: https://www.espi.or.at/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/ESPI-Short-1-Final-Report.p (accessed March 24, 2023).

30. Martha Mejia-Kaiser, “Space Law and Unauthorised Cyber Activities”, Peacetime regime for State activities in cyberspace: international law, international relations and diplomacy, 2013, 349–372.

31. Stephan Hobe, Space Law, (Baden Baden:Nomos, 2019), 218–219.

32. See P.J. Blount, Laetitia Cesari Zarkan, “Coexisting in Low-Earth Orbit: Large Constellations and Cybersecurity Governance”, Air&Space Law 48 (2023): 137–154; Anne-Sophie Martin, Steven Freeland, From One to Many: “Mega” (Constellation) Challenges to the Legal Framework for Outer Space, Annals of Air and Space Law, XLVI, 2021, 131–176.

33. See Anne-Sophie Martin, Steven Freeland, “Food for Thought: Relevant Legan Standards for On-Orbit Servicing Missions and Rendezvous and Proximity Operations”, German Journal of Air and Space Law, 2 (2020): 308–327; Anne-Sophie Martin, Steven Freeland, “Exploring the Legal Challenges of Future On-Orbit Servicing Missions and Proximity Operations”, Journal of Space Law, 43.2 (2019): 196–222.

34. Nils Melzer, Cyberwarfare and International Law, UNIDIR Resources, 2011: https://unidir.org/files/publications/pdfs/cyberwarfare-and-international-law-382.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021); Michael N. Schmitt, “The Law of Cyber Warfare: Quo Vadis?”, Stanford Law & Policy Review, 25 (2014): 269–300; Phillip Pool, “War of the Cyber World: the Law of Cyber Warfare”, The International Lawyer 47, 2 (2013): 299–323; Peter W. Singer, Allan Friedman, Cybersecurity and Cyberwar: What Everyone Needs to Know (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2014).

35. “Cyber Warfare”, Rand Corporation,: https://www.rand.org/topics/cyber-warfare.html (accessed May 12, 2021).

36. UNCOPUOS Guidelines on the Long-Term Sustainability of outer space activities (UNGA Doc. A/74/20, 2019, Annex II: https://www.unoosa.org/res/oosadoc/data/documents/2019/a/a7420_0_html/V1906077.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021); Peter Martinez, “Implementing the Long-Term Sustainability Guidelines:What’s Next?”, Air&Space Law 48 (2023): 41–58.

37. UNGA Res. A/RES/65/68 (5 January 2011); UNGA Doc. A/68/189 (29 July 2013) Report of the GGE: https://undocs.org/A/68/189 (accessed May 12, 2021).

38. UNGA Res. A/RES/73/266 (2 January 2019): https://undocs.org/A/RES/73/266 (accessed May 12, 2021).

39. UNGA Res. A/RES/73/27 (11 December 2018): https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/73/27 (accessed May 12, 2021). In this context, the French ministry of Defense published on 9 September 2019 a document setting out its views on how international law applies in cyberspace. See Przemyslaw Roguski, “France’s Declaration on International Law in Cyberspace: The Law of Peacetime Cyber Operations”, OpinioJuris, 24 September 2019: https://opiniojuris.org/2019/09/24/frances-declaration-on-international-law-in-cyberspace-the-law-of-peacetime-cyber-operations-part-i/ (accessed May 12, 2021).

40. “Cybersecurity”, ITU website,: https://www.itu.int/en/action/cybersecurity/Pages/gca.aspx (accessed May 12, 2021).

41. “IMPACT – International Multilateral Partnership Against Cyber Threats”, ITU website: https://www.itu.int/ITU-D/cyb/cybersecurity/docs/ITU_IMPACT_infopack_.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021); “ITU Impact”, ITU website: https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Regional-Presence/Americas/Documents/ITU-IMPACT%20ALERT.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021).

42. “Guide to Developing a National Cybersecurity Strategy”, ITU website: https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-d/opb/str/D-STR-CYB_GUIDE.01–2018-PDF-E.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021).

43. Masson-Zwaan, Hofmann, Introduction to Space Law, 76.

44. François Delerue, Cyber-opérations et droit international, IRSEM, Note de Recherche n°59, 17 juillet 2018, 1–8.

45. Stephan Hobe, Rada Popova, “Cyber Law and Outer Space (Activities): Legal and Regulatory Challenges”, Proceeding of 61th Colloquium on the Law of the Outer Space of the International Institute for Space Law 2018, (The Hague: Eleven International Publishing, 2019), 659–670.

46. Stefan Kaiser, Martha Mejia-Kaiser, “Cyber Security in Air and Space Law”, German Journal of Air &Space Law 64 (2015): 404.

47. Convention on Cybercrime, Budapest, 23 November 2001, ETS 185: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/documents/libe/dv/7_conv_budapest_/7_conv_budapest_en.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021); Michael Keyser, “The Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime”, Journal of Transnational Law&Policy 12, 2 (2003): 287–326.

48. Articles 4, 5 and 6.

49. Liis Vihul, “The Tallinn Manuel on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare”, EJIL:Talk!, 15 April 2013,: https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-tallinn-manual-on-the-international-law-applicable-to-cyber-warfare/ (accessed May 12, 2021).

50. Eric Talbot Jensen, “The Tallinn Manual 2.0 : Highlights and Insights”, Georgetown Journal of International Law, 48 (2017): 768–770.

51. François Delerue, Analyse du Manuel de Tallinn 2.0 sur le droit international applicable aux cyber-opérations, Etude prospective et stratégique, Ministère des Armées, Novembre 2017, 53–54. See also Tallinn Manual 2.0, 270–271.

52. Tallinn Manual 2.0, 270.

53. Tallinn Manual 2.0, 271; see also P.J. Blount, “Satellites Are Just Things on the Internet of Things”, Air&Space Law 42, 3 (2017): 278.

54. Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, 1972, 961 U.N.T.S.187.

55. Dimitra Stefoudi, “The Relevance and Applicability of Cybersecurity Laws with Regard to Data Storage on Board Satellites and on the Ground”, Air &Space Law 44 (2019): 440.

56. See PJ Blount, Space Traffic Management & Cybersecurity, Presentation University of Luxembourg, 2020: https://www.eu-space.eu/images/2020/document/Slides/Slides-PJ-Blount.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023).

57. “Critical information infrastructures” means “interconnected information systems and networks, whose the disruption or destruction of which would have a serious impact on the health, safety, security, or economic well-being of citizens, or on the effective functioning of government or the economy”. OECD, Recommendation of the Council on the Protection of Critical Information Infrastructures, 2008 (OECE/LEGAL/0361): https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/public/doc/121/121.en.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021); OECD, Recommendation of the Council on Digital Security of Critical Activities, 2019 (OECD/LEGAL/0456): https://www.ccdcoe.org/uploads/2020/01/OECD-191211-The-Recommendation-of-the-Council-on-Digital-Security-of-Critical-Activities.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021); Analysis: Acknowledging Space Systems as “Critical Infrastructure”, National Defense, 5 October 2022: https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2022/5/10/acknowledging-space-systems-as-critical-infrastructure (accessed February 27, 2023).

58. See The War in Ukraine from a Space Cybersecurity Perspective, ESPI Short Report, 10 October 2022: https://www.espi.or.at/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/ESPI-Short-1-Final-Report.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023).

59. Ramses A. Wessel, “Cybersecurity in the European Union: Resilience Through Regulation?”, in The Routledge Handbook of European Security Law and Policy, ed. E Conde, Zhaklin V. Yaneva, Marzia Scopelliti (Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2020), 283–300.

60. Regulation (EU) 2019/881 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on ENISA (the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity) and on information and communications technology cybersecurity certification and repealing Regulation (EU) 526/2013 (Cybersecurity Act): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32019R0881&from=EN (accessed February 27, 2023).

61. The 2020 Cybersecurity Strategy : https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/cybersecurity-strategy (accessed February 28, 2023).

62. Directive (EU) 2022/2555 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14December 2022 on measures for a high common level of cybersecurity across the Union, amending Regulation (EU) 910/2014 and Directive (EU) 2018/1972, and repealing Directive (EU) 2016/1148 (NIS 2 Directive): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32022L2555&qid=1677576402876&from=en (accessed February 28, 2023).

63. Directive (EU) 2022/2557 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14December 2022 on the resilience of critical entities and repealing Council Directive 2008/114/EC: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32022L2557&from=EN (accessed February 28, 2023).

64. The NIS2 Directive: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/nis2-directive(accessed (accessed February 28, 2023).

65. NIS2 Directive, Recitals 37 and 66.

66. CER Directive, Recital 5.

67. The EU Policy on Cyber Defence: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_22_6643 (accessed February 28, 2023).

68. European Union Agency for Cybersecurity: https://www.enisa.europa.eu/topics/national-cyber-security-strategies (accessed May 12, 2021).

69. ENISA, Interactive Map: www.enisa.europa.eu/topics/national-cyber-security-strategies/ncss-map/national-cyber-security-strategies-interactive-map (accessed May 12, 2021).

70. Australian Government, Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC): https://www.cyber.gov.au/ (accessed February 28, 2023); see Australia’s Cyber Security Strategy 2020, 6 August 2020: https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/cyber-security-subsite/files/cyber-security-strategy-2020.pdf (accessed February 28, 2023); Australian Government, Department of Home Affairs, Development of the 2023–2030 Australian Cyber Security Strategy: https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about-us/our-portfolios/cyber-security/strategy/2023–2030-australian-cyber-security-strategy (accessed February 28, 2023).

71. China’s Cybersecurity Law was approved in November 2016, and was implemented on June 1, 2017 with the aim to establish a common regulatory regime for cybersecurity and data protection in China: https://www.tradecommissioner.gc.ca/china-chine/cyber-security_cyber-securite_china-chine.aspx?lang=eng (accessed February 28, 2023); see China Law Insight, A Brief Introduction to China’s Cybersecurity Law, 16 June 2017: https://www.chinalawinsight.com/2017/06/articles/corporate-ma/a-brief-introduction-to-chinas-cybersecurity-law/#more-11453 (accessed May 12, 2021); Mark Grzegorzewski, Christopher Marsh, Incorporating the Cyberspace Domain: How Russia and China Exploit Asymmetric Advantages in Great Power Competition, Modern War Institute, 15 March 2021: https://mwi.usma.edu/incorporating-the-cyberspace-domain-how-russia-and-china-exploit-asymmetric-advantages-in-great-power-competition/ (accessed June 21, 2021); see also Fabio Rugge (ed), Confronting an “Axis of Cyber”? China, Iran, North Korea, Russia in Cyberspace, (Milano, Ledizioni LediPublishing: 2018); Jon R. Lindsay, Tai Ming Cheung, Derek S. Reveron (eds), China and Cybersecurity: Espionage, Strategy, and Politics in the Digital Domain (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015).

72. A National Cybersecurity Policy was established in 2013 with the aim to strengthen security and resilience cyberspace for citizens, businesses and the Government: https://www.indiannavy.nic.in/sites/default/themes/indiannavy/images/pdf/resources/article_6.pdf (accessed February 28, 2023); see National Cyber Security Strategy 2020: https://www.dsci.in/sites/default/files/documents/resource_centre/National%20Cyber%20Security%20Strategy%202020%20DSCI%20submission.pdf (accessed February 28, 2023).

73. On December 16, 2022, the Japanese government approved a cabinet decision on security-related strategic documents: the National Security Strategy (NSS), National Defense Strategy (NDS), and Defense Buildup Program (DBP). In the new NSS, there are two major changes in the cyber domain: the development of an information warfare position and the introduction of active cyber defence into cyber security. See National Security Strategy of Japan, December 2022: https://www.cas.go.jp/jp/siryou/221216anzenhoshou/nss-e.pdf (accessed February 28, 2023).

74. Brandon Bailey, Establishing Space Cybersecurity Policy, Standards, and Risk Management Practices, Aerospace, October 2020: https://aerospace.org/sites/default/files/2020–10/Bailey%20SPD5_20201010%20V2_formatted.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021); see also Gregory Falco, “Cybersecurity Principles for Space Systems”, Journal of Aerospace Information System 16, 2 (2018): 1–10 (doi: 10.2514/1.I010693).

75. Founded in 1901, the NIST is a non-regulatory federal Agency within the U.S. Department of Commerce. It’s mission is to promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards and technology in ways that enhance economic security.

76. Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity, Version 1.1, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 16 April 2018: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/CSWP/NIST.CSWP.04162018.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021); see NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 Concept Paper: Potential Significant Updates to the Cybersecurity Framework, 19 January 2023: https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2023/01/19/CSF_2.0_Concept_Paper_01-18-23.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023).

77. Ibid., p. VI.

78. ISO website: https://www.iso.org/fr/home.html (accessed May 12, 2021).

79. ISO/IEC 27001 and related standards Information security management: https://www.iso.org/isoiec-27001-information-security.html (accessed February 28, 2023).

80. “Certification to ISO/IEC 27001”, ISO: https://www.iso.org/isoiec-27001-information-security.html#ISMS (accessed May 12, 2021).

81. “Keeping Cyber Safe”, ISO website: https://www.iso.org/news/ref2629.html (accessed May 12, 2021).

82. ISO/IEC TS 27100:2020: https://www.iso.org/standard/72434.html (accessed February 28, 2023).

83. “ISO/IEC TS 27,110:2021”, ISO: https://www.iso.org/standard/72435.html (accessed May 12, 2021); see also ISO/IEC TS 27110:2021: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso-iec:ts:27110:ed-1:v1:en (accessed May 12, 2021).

84. ISO/IEC TS 27110:2021: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso-iec:ts:27110:ed-1:v1:en (accessed May 12, 2021).

85. ISO/IEC 27001:2022: https://www.iso.org/standard/82875.html (accessed February 28, 2023).

86. ISO/IEC 27002:2022: https://www.iso.org/standard/75652.html (accessed February 28, 2023).

87. “Resilience for Space Systems: Concepts, Tools and Approaches”, Aerospace Corporation, 2018: https://aerospace.org/sites/default/files/2018–05/Resilience%20for%20Space%20Systems.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021).

88. Isaac Daniel Sanchez-Garcia, Jezreel Mejia, Tomas San Feliu Gilabert, ”Cybersecurity Risk Assessment: A Systematic Mapping Review, Proposal and Validation”, Appl. Sci. 13, 1 (2023): (doi:10.3390/app13010395).

89. “Cybersecurity Legislation 2020”, National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL): https://www.ncsl.org/research/telecommunications-and-information-technology/cybersecurity-legislation-2020.aspx (accessed May 12, 2021).

90. H.R. 1668 – IoT Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2020: https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ207/PLAW-116publ207.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021).

91. Sec. 2.4(A) and (B).

92. Memorandum on Space Policy Directive-5 – Cybersecurity Principles for Space Systems, 4 September 2020: http://aerospace.csis.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Memorandum-on-Space-Policy-Directive-5%E2%80%94Cybersecurity-Principles-for-Space-Systems-_-The-White-House.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021).

93. Rachael Hanna, Natassia Velez, “Space Cybersecurity in the Age of Defending Forward”, LawFareBlog, November 24, 2020 : https://www.lawfareblog.com/space-cybersecurity-age-defending-forward (accessed May 12, 2021).

94. United States, National Cybersecurity Strategy, March 2023: www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/National-Cybersecurity-Strategy-2023.pdf (accessed March 31, 2023). The 'Pillar one' deals with ”Defend Critical Infrastructure”.

95. President Donald J. Trump is Establishing America’s First Comprehensive Cybersecurity Policy for Space Systems, September 2020: https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspm/spd-5-fs.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021).

96. Memorandum on Space Policy Directive-5 – Cybersecurity Principles for Space Systems, 4 September 2020: http://aerospace.csis.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Memorandum-on-Space-Policy-Directive-5%E2%80%94Cybersecurity-Principles-for-Space-Systems-_-The-White-House.pdf (accessed May 12, 2021).

97. Martha Finnemore, Duncan B. Hollis, “Constructing Norms for Global Cybersecurity”, American Journal of International Law 110, 3 (2016): 425–479.

98. Setsuko Aoki, “Law and Military Uses of Outer Space”, in Routledge Handbook of Space Law, ed. Ram S. Jakhu, Paul S. Dempsey (Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2017), 215 ss.

99. Peter Martinez, Richard Crowther, Sergio Marchisio, Gerard Brachet, “Criteria for Developing and Testing Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures (TCBMs) for Outer Space Activities”, Space Policy 30, 2 (2014): 1–7.

100. Jana Robinson, “Space Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures”, in Handbook of Space Security, ed. Kai-Uwe Schrogl, Peter Hays, Jana Robinson, Denis Moura, Christina Giannopapa (New York: Springer, 2015), 291 ss.

101. Helena Correia Mendonça, Cyberspace in Outer Space: New Challenges, New Responses, Via Satellite, January 2017: http://interactive.satellitetoday.com/via/january-2017/cyberspace-in-outer-space-new-challenges-new-responses/ (accessed May 12, 2021).