The Netherlands government published its position on rules applying to security in cyberspace (cyberattacks/cyberwarfare. My short take (the dokument is v. good) government.nl/binaries/gover… 
Sovereignty as a matter of rule applies to cyberspace. But it's extent is not clear. Some investigations may (or may not) be breaching sovereignty of other countries.
Apparently links 'election interference on soc media' with 'intervention'. Is a bunch of trolls an intervention into country affairs? No because it does not effect in behavior change in 'targeted state' (who?)? But you can imagine a State leader issuing threats on social media?
Interesting the NL analysis goes into human rights in cyberspace. I didn't see this interlinked very often. Further regulation ('freedom of expression'?) in the long term not ruled out.
On attribution the document is v. concise so extremely informative. Technical the lowest level. Political is a government decision. Legal attribution is the most demanding. Lawful response to cyberattacks must be justified legally. So hold your cyber-horses!
My analysis of the Dutch approach to security of cyberspace (also cyberwarfare). Highlights the importance of following the rules and the three levels of attribution of cyberattacks: technical, policy, legal. blog.lukaszolejnik.com/dutch-applicat…
