Lately, my news feeds and Google search alerts have been filled with talk of cyber war. Article after article has referred to a number of cyberattacks as acts of cyberwar, but clarification is needed. While there is not total agreement internationally about what constitutes an act of cyberwar, there are some examples that should be used to properly classify these events.

Secretary of Defense Ash Carter has gone on record and stated that an act of cyberwarfare is defined as a cyberattack on critical infrastructure, the economy or U.S. military operations. To further clarify his definition, he said the cyberattack that was attributed to North Korea against Sony did not rise to the level of an act of war.

However, the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence lists the United States' definition of cyberwar is the use of computers to disrupt the activities of an enemy country, especially the deliberate attacking of communication systems. One individual familiar with the topic summed it up nicely: "We can’t even agree if [cyberattack] is one or two words. How do you expect everyone to agree on what constitutes a cyberwar? Oh wait, is cyberwar one or two words?"

Just look at the difference between those two definitions. Then think for a moment about all the definitions by our NATO allies, the United Nations and others have. Has an international cyberwar begun? How would we know if there is not a definition we can all agree upon?

This subject matter has intensified after the recent cyberattack on the Ukrainian power grid industrial control systems that resulted in a blackout in December 2015 and plunged 700,000 homes into darkness. Setting an agreed upon definition of what constitutes a cyberattack should be a high priority topic for the United Nations. The definition of "I'll know it when I see it" is not acceptable.