In response to the Russian cyber attacks that have accompanied its invasion of Ukraine, the Ukrainian government has begun recruiting what it calls an “IT army”.
Perhaps a more accurate term would be a “cyber militia”, given it will consist of civilian volunteers. In any case, it aims to repel Russian hackers’ attacks, and launching cyber counterstrikes of its own.
Ukrainian Vice Prime Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, who is also the country’s digital transformation minister, has called “digital talents” to join the resistance effort.
We are creating an IT army. We need digital talents. All operational tasks will be given here: https://t.co/Ie4ESfxoSn. There will be tasks for everyone. We continue to fight on the cyber front. The first task is on the channel for cyber specialists.
— Mykhailo Fedorov (@FedorovMykhailo) February 26, 2022
Reports suggest more than 275,000 volunteers from around the world have already answered the call, although verifying an exact figure is impossible at the moment.
A will to help – but are we allowed?
Russia’s war on Ukraine is half a world away from Australia. But many Australians recognise the importance of helping Ukraine, on both humanitarian grounds and because of the wider geopolitical ramifications.
While countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada and Denmark have opened the door for their citizens to enlist in Ukraine’s international territorial defence legion, the Canberra government has so far advised Australians not to do so.
But in an interconnected world, volunteers who are unwilling or unable to physically help Ukraine could potentially join its cyber militia.
However, there’s one snag as far as Australians are concerned: Australia’s criminal law makes it illegal to engage in many of the activities that might be required of members of a foreign-organised cyber militia. Put simply, “hacking” is a crime.
A proposed ‘cyber militia bill’
The Australian government has not publicly expressed a view on whether Australians should be barred outright from joining Ukraine’s cyber fight.
One way the government could address this would be to introduce specific legislation aimed at creating legal safeguards for genuine members of a foreign state-run cyber militia, within a narrowly defined set of circumstances.
Such people would need protection from being held to have violated the hacking-related provisions of Australia’s criminal law. And they would also need legal safeguards against civil liability and against being extradited.
This protection should apply unless the person has acted in violation of international law.
Of course, such legislation would need to be carefully designed, and its implications rigorously considered.
Policing the cyber army
One problem with cyber attacks is the issue of attribution. It can be hard to identify who is responsible for the attack with the level of confidence required under international law. This means cyber attackers often have a crucial advantage over those seeking to defend against them.
“Non-state actors” such as hacker groups might be willing to attack targets that are off-limits for state agents, such as hospitals or other civilian infrastructure. This can cause conflicts to escalate dangerously.
Consequently, it is vital that any proposed legal protection for cyber combatants would be conditional on governmental oversight. In my proposal, this is achieved by the involvement of both the Australian government and that of the foreign power in direct control over the cyber militia.
More specifically, this means the Australian government should have the discretion to designate that a specific country’s cyber militia (and not those of other countries) as being governed by the new rules.
I suggest the government should consider exercising that discretion where:
- a foreign state has established the cyber militia;
- that foreign state has invited foreigners to join its cyber militia; and
- that foreign state is under armed attack by another state.
Only members of such a designated cyber militia would be protected. That ensures Australia can prescribe the situations in which it deems it acceptable for Australian citizens to engage in cyber warfare as part of a foreign cyber militia.
Further to this, participants should only enjoy legal safeguards where they have acted on specific orders issued by the foreign state in control of the militia. This is the second method of ensuring state control, and in the current situation, that control would be exercised by the Ukraine.
Another important question is how to strike a balance between offensive and defensive activities. To minimise the risk of Australia being seen to violate international law, I propose that only “defensive activities” - such as measures safeguarding vital computer systems in Ukraine - would be legalised for Australian members of a foreign cyber militia, and these “defensive activities” should be defined very carefully.
A necessary step, but not the only one
Clearly, this proposal is a response to the current invasion of Ukraine, and the Russian cyber aggression that has accompanied it. But given future wars are also likely to be fought in cyber space, this proposal will also be more broadly relevant.
Sooner or later, Australia will have to reckon with the prospect of significant numbers of citizens becoming involved in foreign cyber warfare. And there’s truly no time like the present.
A version of my proposal could usefully be adopted by any nation that wants to support the defence of Ukraine. But in the meantime, there are still things concerned Australians can do to help the Ukrainians.
Donations to carefully selected organisations is one option, but social media abounds with other possibilities too. One creative option is to counter Russian disinformation by posting verified information about the atrocities on any Russian site that allows user posts – such as restaurant reviews, for example. Such posts are very likely to be removed, but if posted in sufficient numbers they may reach some of the Russian people.


SpaceX IPO Hype Raises Questions as Many Major Stock Debuts Underperform Market
Marvell Stock Rises After Record Q1 FY2027 Earnings Fueled by AI Demand
SpaceX Starship V3 Test Flight Boosts IPO Momentum Ahead of Historic Market Debut
Lam Research Expands AI-Powered Semiconductor Tools and Arizona Operations
Synopsys Q2 FY2026 Earnings Beat Driven by AI and Semiconductor Demand
EU Antitrust Probe Could Lead to Massive Google Fine Under DMA Rules
Elon Musk Explores Possible Tesla-SpaceX Merger Amid Growing AI Investments
HP Q2 2026 Earnings Beat Expectations Despite Memory Chip Pressure
Kentucky School District Secures $27 Million in Social Media Addiction Lawsuit Settlements
Meta AI Push Could Add $26 Billion in Revenue by 2027, Wolfe Research Says
Snowflake Stock Soars 30% After Q1 Earnings Beat and Major AWS AI Partnership
Dell Raises 2027 Revenue Forecast as AI Server Demand Drives Record Quarterly Results
Samsung Workers Approve Wage Deal, Avoiding Major Strike and Boosting Chip Supply Confidence
Blue Origin New Glenn Rocket Explodes During Launch Pad Test, Delaying Space Ambitions
PDG Explores $1 Billion Sale of China Data Center Assets
Mega IPOs Like SpaceX and OpenAI Could Reshape S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 Portfolios in 2026
MongoDB Q1 FY2027 Earnings Beat Expectations, Raises Full-Year Outlook 



