The Art of Cyberwar | Part XIII | The Use of Spies

The principles:

“Knowledge of the enemy’s dispositions can only be obtained from other men.”

“However, spies cannot be usefully employed without a certain intuitive sagacity.”

“Be subtle and use your spies for every kind of business.”

“Hence, it is only the enlightened ruler and the wise general who will use the highest intelligence of the army for purposes of spying, and thereby they achieve great results.”

The Quiet After the Fire

After the smoke clears, the last weapon isn’t destruction; it’s knowledge. Sun Tzu closes his book here, not with conquest, but with insight. The general who knows through others, he says, wins without fighting. The one who fights without knowing spends blood buying what wisdom could have earned.

In modern form, intelligence replaces escalation. Information, verified and interpreted, is the ultimate force multiplier.

The Five Spies

Sun Tzu’s framework remains elegant and practical. He identifies five types of spies, each still alive and well in today’s cyber and geopolitical landscape.

  1. Local spies = insiders, collaborators, citizens.
    • Modern analogue: human intelligence, insider threat programs, whistleblowers, or local analysts embedded in culture.
    • Lesson: you can’t know an environment without someone who breathes its air.
  2. Inward spies – the enemy’s own people who provide insight.
    • Modern analogue: defectors, double agents, internal whistleblowers, or compromised insiders in adversary organizations.
    • In cyber: infiltration of adversary forums, threat actor telemetry, or behavioral analysis of attacker TTPs.
  3. Converted spies – enemy agents who have been turned.
    • Modern analogue: captured malware turned into indicators, enemy disinformation repurposed for exposure.
    • Intelligence and counterintelligence merge – data becomes self-revealing.
  4. Doomed spies – agents sent with false information, knowing they will be sacrificed.
    • Modern analogue: honeypots, decoy networks, misinformation campaigns used to draw out adversaries.
    • Lesson: deception has cost; calculate it.
  5. Surviving spies – those who return with verified knowledge.
    • Modern analogue: analysts who gather, vet, and integrate multiple data sources to produce actual intelligence.
    • Lesson: data isn’t knowledge until it’s interpreted and fed back into strategy.

The five together form a complete intelligence loop: gather, plant, deceive, sacrifice, verify.
Today, we refer to this as the intelligence cycle.

Information as the New Espionage

We live in an age where everything and everyone collects or steals your data. Apps harvest movement. Sensors record temperature and tone. Governments build databases so vast they blur into prophecy.

But the principle hasn’t changed: intelligence is not about having information – it’s about understanding what matters and when.

A terabyte of telemetry means nothing without discernment. One well-placed attacker can outperform a thousand firewalls.

Foreign Policy and the Failure of Insight

Throughout the 20th century, U.S. foreign policy often suffered from information abundance but a lack of the ability to interpret the intelligence it had gathered.

  • Pearl Harbor: a multitude of signals existed, but interpretation failed.
  • Vietnam: metrics replaced meaning – body counts masquerading as progress.
  • Iraq WMDs: intelligence distorted to paint a specific picture rather than inform decision-making.
  • Afghanistan: decades of data existed without a clear endgame, destroyed thousands of American lives, and wasted trillions of taxpayers’ dollars.

Each case proves Sun Tzu’s point: “If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

Intelligence was there, but self-awareness wasn’t. Knowing isn’t only about them; it’s about seeing what you refuse to see in yourself.

Cyber Intelligence: Seeing Without Touching

In cybersecurity, the “spies” are telemetry, sensors, analysts, and sometimes friendly adversaries.
Every alert, log, and anomaly is a scout’s report. But like all intelligence, its value depends on interpretation.

  • Local spies: internal logs and behavior analytics.
  • Inward spies: penetration testing, red-team operations, insider threat programs.
  • Converted spies: captured malware and attacker infrastructure repurposed for defense.
  • Doomed spies: honeypots, deception networks, and fake data seeds.
  • Surviving spies: analysts, threat-hunters, and intel-sharing alliances.

The objective is clarity without exposure, to see everything while remaining unseen. Fire consumes, intelligence illuminates.

The Moral Dimension of Knowing

Intelligence work carries moral weight. Spies, human or digital, trade in trust. Sun Tzu demands that the general handle them with the highest regard: reward them generously, guard them carefully, and never waste them carelessly.

The ethical parallel today is privacy. The line between intelligence and intrusion is measured in intent and restraint. Knowledge gathered without purpose is voyeurism. Knowledge used without reflection is manipulation.

Sun Tzu’s ideal: learn enough to prevent war, not to justify one.

Strategic Lessons for Leaders

  1. Listen to your scouts.
    Truth often arrives quietly, wrapped in discomfort. Leaders who dismiss dissent lose foresight.
  2. Reward information honestly.
    Transparency and gratitude feed the flow of truth; fear and ego choke it.
  3. Centralize interpretation, not collection.
    Many sensors, one mind – unified analysis, decentralized data.
  4. Balance secrecy with accountability.
    Intelligence held too tightly becomes blindness.
  5. Use information to avoid fire.
    The goal of knowledge is to make destruction unnecessary.

From Fire to Silence

The transition from Attack by Fire to Use of Spies is the book’s moral hinge. After escalation comes discernment; after destruction, discipline.

Sun Tzu understood what modern states and corporations often forget: Force is crude, information is subtle – and subtlety wins the wars that power cannot.

In cybersecurity, this is the move from reaction to anticipation. In foreign policy, it’s the evolution from aggression to diplomacy. In leadership, it’s the shift from command to comprehension.

The best security posture isn’t dominance – it’s awareness. The most powerful army is one that rarely fights.

Epilogue — The Quiet Art

The Art of War ends not with blood or banners, but with silence, a stillness that comes from mastery.

True security, like true wisdom, is invisible.
It doesn’t announce itself.
It doesn’t need to.

When you know yourself and your adversary, every threat is already half-dissolved. When you act only when necessary, victory becomes maintenance rather than spectacle. And when you can learn from what moves unseen, you stop fighting the same battles over and over again.

As Operation Aurora proved, a sophisticated cyber espionage campaign that quietly infiltrated major tech companies, the side with better intelligence rarely needs to escalate; quiet knowledge can outmaneuver brute force.

That’s the art of cyberwar – when you know yourself and your adversary, every threat is already half-dissolved. When you act only when necessary, victory becomes maintenance rather than spectacle. And when you can learn from what moves unseen, you stop fighting the same battles over and over again.

That is the final lesson of Sun Tzu, and of cyberwar:
Not destruction, but understanding.
Not conquest, but control of your own attention.
Not escalation, but insight.

Not noise, but silence.

The art is not in the fight, but in the knowing. Return always to the principle: “Knowledge of the enemy’s dispositions can only be obtained from other men.”

And, in the end, mastery is realizing you rarely need to fight at all.

The Art of Cyberwar | Part III | Attack by Stratagem

The principle:
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.  Sun Tzu – Chapter III

the golden era

Strategy vs. Stratagem

A strategy is designed for longevity, while a stratagem addresses immediate challenges. Strategy anticipates years ahead to foster resilience. Stratagem focuses on the next breach, exploit, or distraction.

Within cybersecurity, strategy encompasses architectural design, layered controls, validated incident response plans, and a culture prepared to act decisively during crises. Stratagem represents the attacker’s tools, such as persuasive emails, covert code injections, or precisely timed physical penetration tests.

Both approaches are powerful, yet each possesses inherent limitations.

The Modern Battlefield: Fluid and Fractured

The threat landscape evolves continuously. Traditional boundaries are replaced by cloud environments, API vulnerabilities, and interconnected third-party networks. Security architects must prioritize adaptability and fluidity over static defenses to effectively mitigate risks.

Zero Trust principles, continuous validation, and integrated security practices throughout the development lifecycle enable proactive identification and mitigation of vulnerabilities prior to production deployment. In an environment where compromise is presumed and rapid response is critical, these measures are indispensable.

Effective defenders adopt a proactive stance. They anticipate adversary actions, analyze behavioral patterns, and design systems to adapt under attack rather than fail.

Attack by Stratagem: The Psychology of Exploitation

Major breaches often originate through psychological manipulation rather than technical flaws. Techniques such as phishing, vishing, and deepfakes exploit cognitive vulnerabilities to diminish user awareness. This approach mirrors historical propaganda methods, where controlling perception leads to controlling behavior.

While governments previously leveraged headlines and radio broadcasts, contemporary attackers exploit digital interfaces such as login pages and hyperlinks. Both strategies depend on user fatigue, habitual behavior, and misplaced trust. If users believe a fraudulent login page is legitimate, they inadvertently compromise security.

Similarly, if citizens equate fear with patriotism, they may relinquish critical judgment in favor of perceived safety. As Ben Franklin observed, individuals who prioritize temporary safety over essential liberty may ultimately forfeit both: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

This tactic operates effectively across a spectrum, from individual email inboxes to broader ideological movements.

The Architecture of Awareness

A resilient security architecture reflects the characteristics of an aware and vigilant mindset.

Network segmentation limits the blast radius. Application hardening predicts misuse before it happens.

Firewalls and Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems provide the critical, irreplaceable resource of time.

Knowing your environment is knowing yourself.

Without a thorough understanding of all dependencies, exposures, and behavioral patterns, it is impossible to detect significant changes or anomalies. The same principle applies at the national level: when societies cease to critically evaluate their narratives, division and deception proliferate with ease.

Propaganda Built Into the Code

James Montgomery Flagg, I Want You for U.S. Army, 1917, collection of Chip and Carrie Robertson, photo by Robert Wedemeyer
James Montgomery Flagg, I Want You for U.S. Army, 1917, collection of Chip and Carrie Robertson, photo by Robert Wedemeyer

From Woodrow Wilson’s Committee on Public Information to the televised theater of Desert Storm, America learned how framing shapes belief.

Attackers apply similar principles, constructing their deceptive tactics by exploiting established trust.

Deceptive login pages replicate corporate portals, ransomware communications adopt professional language, and deepfakes are crafted to appear and sound authentic.

The primary threat is not the attack itself, but the absence of awareness regarding potential dangers. Stratagem prevails when critical scrutiny is abandoned.

Reverse Engineering the Present

Post-incident analyses consistently reveal that warning signals were present before breaches. Although alerts, logs, and telemetry data were available, they did not translate into actionable understanding.

Visibility does not equate to genuine situational awareness.

Historical events reinforce this observation.

The United States has engaged in conflicts based on incomplete or inaccurate information, often mistaking perception for certainty.

In both cybersecurity and geopolitics, failure frequently results from conflating raw data with meaningful insight.

Understanding adversaries requires effective intelligence gathering, including threat hunting, reconnaissance, and red-team exercises.

Self-awareness in cybersecurity necessitates discipline, such as maintaining asset visibility, ensuring policy integrity, and sustaining composure during operations.

A deficiency in either area enables adversarial stratagems to succeed.

The Quiet Defense

The most robust networks, analogous to resilient individuals, operate discreetly.
They do not engage in ostentatious displays; instead, they maintain a constant state of preparedness.

Their resilience is embedded within their structural design rather than expressed through rhetoric.

Authentic resilience does not stem from more active dashboards or faster technical tools. Resilience is rooted in organizational culture, situational awareness, and a humble approach. It is defined by the ability to learn, adapt, and respond more rapidly than emerging threats.

Cybersecurity, akin to statecraft, is a continuous endeavor to prevent breaches. Success is achieved not by engaging in every conflict, but by anticipating and neutralizing threats before they materialize, thereby securing victory without ever having to fight. Bringing us full circle back to understanding the fundamental nature of the original principle: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.