writes "The term cyberwar has become a catch-all used by politicians, talking heads and others to encompass just about any online threat, regardless of the attacker or the target. Among security professionals, however, the word has a specific connotation--an attack by one nation against another nation's infrastructure. Aside from the semantic issues, one of the major challenges for government agencies and security teams dealing with his problem is attribution and recognizing what constitutes an actual act of cyberwar. Stuxnet, Flame and their cousins may qualify, but more discussion is needed to help define the terms of these new conflicts, experts say.
One of the key problems is that virtually any attack tool could be defined as a cyberweapon, depending upon the context, the target and the attacker. Certainly tools such as Duqu fall into that category, but so might simple remote-access Trojans under certain circumstances. Who makes that call? Right now, it's mainly made by either the victim or a security researcher on the outside.
"There's no definition of cyberweapons. What's the difference between cyberweapons and traditional ones?" said Eugene Kaspersky, CEO of Kaspersky Lab, in a discussion on Tuesday. "One difference is software is software. People can make a copy, disassemble it, learn its tricks.""Link to Original Source