[
1. Abazi, V., and Eckes, C., 2018. Closed evidence in EU courts: Security, secrets and access to justice. Common Market Law Review, 55(3), 753-782. http://www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?area=Journals&id=COLA2018069.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
2. Bertrand, N., Liptak, K., Fung, B., 2021. Biden administration debating whether and how to sanction China for ransomware attacks, www.cnn.com 20 July 2021. https://edition.cnn.com/2021/07/19/politics/china-biden-ransomware/index.html.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
3. Bettauer, R. J., 2014. Questions Relating to the Seizure and Detention of Certain Documents and Data (Timor-Leste v. Australia). Provisional Measures Order, The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 108, No. 4 (October 2014), pp 763-769.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
4. Buchan, R., 2018. Cyber Espionage and International Law, Hart Publishing.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
5. Chachko, E., 2019. Due Process Is in the Details: US Targeted Economic Sanctions and International Human Rights Law, 113 AJIL Unbound 157-162.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
6. Cheng, B., Properly Speaking, Only Celestial Bodies Have Been Reserved for Use Exclusively for Peaceful (Non-Military) Purposes, but Not Outer Void Space, International Law Studies – Volume 75 (2000) – International Law Across the Spectrum of Conflict: Essays in Honour of Professor L.C. Green On the Occasion of His Eightieth Birthday. Michael N. Schmitt (Ed.).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
7. Chimène, K., 2021. Foreign Election Interference and International Law In: Duncan B. Hollis and Jens David Ohlin (Eds.), Defending Democracies. Oxford University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
8. Chimène, K., 2019. Attribution by Indictment. UC Hastings Research Paper No. 316. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3322943, 9 January 2019.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
9. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – On the European Democracy Action Plan, 3 December 2020 COM (2020) 790 Final.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
10. Council of the EU, Parliamentary Question, Answer to Question E-002456/21, 22 September 2021. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2021-002456-ASW_EN.html.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
11. Daugirdas, K., and Mortenson, D. J., 2014. Contemporary practice of the United States relating to international law. The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 108, No. 4, [American Society of International Law, Cambridge University Press], 2014, pp 783-842. https://doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.108.4.0783.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
12. Declaration by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union urging Chinese authorities to take action against malicious cyber activities undertaken from its territory, 19 July 2021. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2021/07/19/declaration-by-the-high-representative-on-behalf-of-the-eu-urging-china-to-take-action-against-malicious-cyber-activities-undertaken-from-its-territory/.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
13. Department of Justice – Office of Public Affairs, Chinese Military Personnel Charged with Computer Fraud, Economic Espionage and Wire Fraud for Hacking into Credit Reporting Agency Equifax, 10 February 2020. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-military-personnel-charged-computer-fraud-economic-espionage-and-wire-fraud-hacking.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
14. Department of Justice – Office of Public Affairs, North Korean Regime-Backed Programmer Charged With Conspiracy to Conduct Multiple Cyber Attacks and Intrusions, 6 September 2018. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/north-korean-regime-backed-programmer-charged-conspiracy-conduct-multiple-cyber-attacks-and.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
15. Department of Justice – Office of Public Affairs, Ohio Resident Charged with Operating Darknet-Based Bitcoin »Mixer,« which Laundered Over $300 Million, 13 February 2020, https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/ohio-resident-charged-operating-darknet-based-bitcoin-mixer-which-laundered-over-300-million.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
16. Department of Justice – Office of Public Affairs, US Charges Russian FSB Officers and Their Criminal Conspirators for Hacking Yahoo and Millions of Email Accounts, 15 March 2017. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-charges-russian-fsb-officers-and-their-criminal-conspirators-hacking-yahoo-and-millions.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
17. Drake, R., 2004. The Soviet Dimension of Italian Communism [Review of Oro da Mosca: I Finanziamenti Sovietici al PCI dalla Rivoluzione d’Ottobre al Crollo dell’URSS; L’Oro di Mosca: La Verità sui Finanziamenti Sovietici al PCI Raccontata dal Diretto Protagonista. 2nd Ed., by V. Riva & G. Cervetti. Journal of Cold War Studies, 6(3), 115-119. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26925390.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
18. European Council (19 and 20 March 2015) – Conclusions.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
19. European Council (24 and 25 May 2021) – Conclusions.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
20. European Court of Auditors Special Report No 09/2021, Disinformation Affecting the EU: Tackled but not Tamed.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
21. Fiore, P., 1837-1914; Borchard, E. M., 1884-1951, International Law Codified and its Legal Sanction: Or, The Legal Organization of the Society of States.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
22. Geissler, E., and Hunt Sprinkle, R., 2013. Disinformation Squared: Was the HIV-from-Fort-Detrick Myth a Stasi Success? Politics and the Life Sciences, Vol. 32, No. 2, Association for Politics and the Life Sciences, pp. 2-99. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43287281.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
23. Hemmings, J., Swire, N., 2019. The Cloud Act Is Not a Tool for Theft of Trade Secrets, 23 April 2019, https://www.lawfareblog.com/cloud-act-not-tool-theft-trade-secrets.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
24. Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council on EU-Russia relations – Push Back, Constrain and Engage, dated 16. June 2021 – JOIN (2021) 20 Final.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
25. Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Action Plan against Disinformation, 5. December 2018 JOIN (2018) 36 Final.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
26. Krizek, M. B., 1988. The Protective Principle of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: A Brief History and an Application of the Principle to Espionage as an Illustration of Current United States Practice, Boston University International Law Journal 6, No. 2 (Fall 1988): pp 337-360.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
27. Lahmann, H., 2020. Information Operations and the Question of Illegitimate Interference under International Law (June 2020). Israel Law Review, Volume 53, Issue 2, pp 189-224 36, June 2020.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
28. Lotrionte, C., 2014. Countering State-Sponsored Cyber Economic Espionage under International Law, 40 – NC. J. INT’L L. 443.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
29. Lubin, A., 2018. Cyber Law and Espionage Law as Communicating Vessels (March 17, 2018). Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Cyber Conflict, CyCon X: Maximising Effects, NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence (CCDCOE) (2018), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3099769.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
30. Mueller Report – US Dep’t of Justice, Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Election Vol. I, 1-5 (2019), p 35.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
31. National Archives and Records Administration, RG 273, Records of the National Security Council, NSC 10/2. Top Secret. No drafting information appears in the source text. An earlier, similar version, 30 April, in Ibid., RG 59, Records of the Department of State, Policy Planning Staff Files 1944-47: Lot 64 D 563, Box 11.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
32. NATO-wide co-operation and coordination in the field of psychological warfare – proposal by the Federal Republic of Germany, 1960. Available at: https://archives.nato.int/nato-wide-co-operation-and-co-ordination-in-field-of-psychological-warfare-proposal-by-federal-republic-of-germany.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
33. Navarrete, I., and Buchan, R., 2019. Out of the Legal Wilderness: Peacetime Espionage, International Law and the Existence of Customary Exceptions, Cornell International Law Journal: Vol. 51: No. 4, Article 4.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
34. Ney, Hon. P. C. Jr., 2020. DOD General Counsel Remarks at US Cyber Command Legal Conference – 2 March 2020. https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Speeches/Speech/Article/2099378/dod-general-counsel-remarks-at-us-cyber-command-legal-conference/.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
35. Official compendium of voluntary national contributions on the subject of how international law applies to the use of information and communications technologies by States submitted by participating governmental experts in the Group of Governmental Experts on Advancing Responsible State Behaviour in Cyberspace in the Context of International Security established according to General Assembly resolution 73/266. UN document A/76/136 dated 13 July 2021.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
36. Ohlin, J. D., 2021. Election Interference: A Unique Harm Requiring Unique Solutions, 1 November 2018. Defending Democracies: Combating Foreign Election Interference in a Digital Age (Oxford University Press, 2021), Cornell Legal Studies Research Paper No. 18-50. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3276940 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3276940.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
37. Oppenheim, L., 1905. International Law Vol. 1, 1905. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.24439/page/n529/mode/2up?q=spy.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
38. Orde F. K., 2016. Lawfare – Law as a Weapon of War, Oxford University Press 2016.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
39. Patrick, T. C. R., 2015. »Absolute Friends«: US Espionage against Germany and Public International Law. In: Revue Québécoise de Droit International, Volume 28-2, 2015. pp 173-203. https://www.persee.fr/doc/rqdi_0828-9999_2015_num_28_2_2188.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
40. Pompeo, M. R., 2019. U. S. Secretary of State, Why Diplomacy Matters (Questions and Answers), 15 April, 2019. From the official US State Department transcript. https://2017-2021.state.gov/remarks-at-texas-am-wiley-lecture-series/index.html.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
41. Quint, P. E., 1997. The Imperfect Union: Constitutional Structures of German Unification. Princeton University Press, 1997, pp 213-214.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
42. Radsan, A. J., 2007. The Unresolved Equation of Espionage and International Law, 28 MICH. J. INT’L L. 595.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
43. Schmitt, M., 2021. Foreign Cyber Interference in Elections. Vol. 97, International Law Studies 2021.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
44. Schmitt, M., 2021. Germany’s Positions on International Law in Cyberspace Part I. https://www.justsecurity.org/, 9 March 2021.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
45. Selvage, D., 2019. Operation »Denver«: The East German Ministry of State Security and the KGB’s AIDS Disinformation Campaign, 1985-1986 (Part 1). Journal of Cold War Studies 2019; 21 (4): 71-123. https://doi.org/10.1162/jcws_a_00907.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
46. Shane, S., 2018. NEWS ANALYSIS – Russia Is not the Only One Meddling in Elections. We Do It, Too, The New York Times, 17 February 2018.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
47. Soesanto, S., 2020. Europe Has No Strategy on Cyber Sanctions, November 20, 2020. https://www.lawfareblog.com/, https://www.lawfareblog.com/europe-has-no-strategy-cyber-sanctions.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
48. Statement by the President on Actions in Response to Russian Malicious Cyber Activity and Harassment, 29 December 2016. In that statement, President Obama attributed to Russia (only) the violation of »established international norms of behaviour«, but not the violation of international law. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/12/29/statement-president-actions-response-russian-malicious-cyber-activity.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
49. Stone, J.,1962. Legal Problems of Espionage in Conditions of Modern Conflict, Essays on Espionage and International Law. OHIO State University Press 1962.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
50. Strawbridge, J., 2016. The Big Bluff: Obama, Cyber Economic Espionage, and the Threat of WTO Litigation, 47 GEO. J. INT’l L. 833.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
51. Tondini, M., 2019. Espionage and International Law in the Age of Permanent Competition. Military Law and the Law of War Review Vol. 57, No. 1, 2018-2019.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
52. Van Wie Davis, E., 2021. Shadow Warfare: Cyberwar Policy in the United States, Russia and China, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
53. Whitehouse Statements and Releases – The United States, Joined by Allies and Partners, Attributes Malicious Cyber Activity and Irresponsible State Behavior to the People’s Republic of China, 19 July 2021. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/07/19/the-united-states-joined-by-allies-and-partners-attributes-malicious-cyber-activity-and-irresponsible-state-behavior-to-the-peoples-republic-of-china/.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
54. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1971, Vol. II, Part One, pp 265-266.
]Search in Google Scholar
