Who is Responsible for Industrial Espionage by Hackers?

This is nothing really new. Obviously, better security is required. Why even ask that question? The trick is to be better at it than everyone else (both offensively and defensively).

We have been dealing with various forms of espionage since the dawn of civilization. Probable deniability has always been the theme song of the day, too.

As far as the UN goes, there isn't a more corrupt organization on this planet, so why bother naming them as the spearhead of valor in this affair?

"Responsible", "liable" or "culpable"? The answer might be different in each case.

It is called natural selection. Went on since the dawn of time. Ask Darwin. Get on with it, or step aside. Somehow freezing the world for you lazy comfort? I think you should apply to the UN as a flunky. Perfect fit.

This appears to be a job for Interpol! I cannot believe that things have been allowed to deteriorate to the state we now find ourselves in. Laws should be enacted that have penalties including blocking access to the net for countries that do not clean up their act.

The UN can do whatever it wants. The US will do whatever they want, and other countries will do the same. Trying to make/enforce laws which carry stiff penalties for meddling in another country's cybersphere is almost pointless. The US cannot even extradite another UN/NATO country's citizens when they have committed heinous crimes against the US and its people. The US has enough problems of its own just trying to catch cybercriminals in their own backyard. The laws just make it that much more difficult to catch/prosecute the offenders.

It is best left to lawlessness so proper justice can be meted out, i.e., do unto others. You attack my DoD computers, I attack yours and may the best man win.

It is a waste of time and resources to pursue, unless your occupation lists this in your position description.

Save the drama for your mama.

You wrote, "It is best left to lawlessness so proper justice can be meted out, i.e., do unto others. You attack my DoD computers, I attack yours and may the best man win."

The problem with that is that many of these attacks are not simply trying to disrupt a server, but to cull sensitive and secrete military information.

In this case what mechanism do you feel is going to be a deterrent for another country?

The proposal that you suggested, you steal my secretes and we will steal copies back, fails when one of the two countries has much less to lose with a counterattack.

For instance, the US is a treasure trove of secrets. A third world country probably has little of value to the US, so compromise from US retalitory hacking would be of a lessor consequence than compromising US secrets. Those US secrets could be resold to multiple third parties, such as China, Russia, Iran, etc., which may have been the original goal.

Secondly, it becomes very murky to prove the true source of an attack. If plausible deniability exists, retaliation may simply lead to an escalation of events to the point where attacks migrate from the virtual world to real weapons stores.

Nothing in my argument supports the UN as the final arbiter for dealing justice, but I do believe that there needs to be some form of comprehensive deterrent above and beyond your recommended solution.