Something about cyberconflict that makes sense to me now is the need for an expanded version of Just War Theory to account for its complexities. For example, reasons such as ambiguity in who is involved with the conflict and where attacks come from. The traditional approach to warfare would have specific people attacking from a single area or location, but due to anyone having the potential to be a malicious actor and cyber-attacks coming from any place with enough technological capability, that older style isn’t effective in a new setting. Another example is how the Just War Theory cannot account for the scope of attacks. With attacks like Stuxnet, while there is a specific target, there is potential for it to spread and cause unintentional damage that is not part of the conflict. This then culminates with how new agreements on cyberconflict need to be enforced for new ethical regulations of action. Concepts such as attacks to resolve conflict and return to the status quo, and emphasis on removing, and preventing entropy within the Infosphere are necessary principles for cyberconflict. This is opposed to a traditional perspective of attacks being in retaliation, or simply out of a sense of self-satisfaction. In conclusion, this module effectively taught me about the ethical components of cyberconflict and the necessary changes that need to be implemented for proper engagement of cyber warfare.