Israel-Iran cyber warfare rewrites the rules of modern combat

While the world's cameras fixated on explosions and the missile exchanges between Israel and Iran, another war was quietly raging in an invisible arena: cyberspace. This digital front has proven just as fierce, with both sides trading cyberattacks as airstrikes.

From the earliest moments of the Israeli strike, there was a dramatic escalation. Cybersecurity firm Radware observed a 700% spike in digital assaults on Israel within just two days, compared to pre–June 12 levels.

Analysts attributed this to Iranian entities, either official or aligned with Tehran. The attacks ranged from distributed denial-of-service/DDoS operations and infrastructure breaches to data theft and malware deployment.

Mutual attacks in the digital realm

Google identified Iranian attempts to infiltrate the US government and military systems, sparking fears that malware could spread into private institutions around the world. Cyberspace is interconnected, and any assault on digital assets in conflict zones risks cascading global effects—particularly in finance and tech.

The battlefield widened with the entry of non-state actors. Predatory Sparrow, a group known for supporting Israel, claimed responsibility for an attack on Iran's Sepah Bank, which brought down its website and ATM services.

The group described Sepah as a financier of Iran’s missile and nuclear programs and said the operation was carried out with the help of “brave Iranians.”

In retaliation, pro-Iranian cyber groups like Mysterious Team Bangladesh and Arabian Ghost entered the fray, threatening Jordan and Saudi Arabia for what they saw as backing for Israel. They also claimed they had disrupted Israeli radio stations.

Iran's digital doctrine centers on retaliatory strikes in response to physical aggression. Following the Israeli bombing of sensitive sites in Tehran, Iran escalated its digital campaign to include Israeli allies and overseas interests—while carefully avoiding provocations that might draw major powers into the conflict.

Israel, in turn, declared a state of cyber emergency, activating reserve cyber defense units to protect its digital infrastructure. But this mobilization had unintended effects: experts warned that transferring large numbers of tech specialists into military roles could expose civilian sectors, especially tech companies, to unanticipated attacks.

Centers of knowledge under fire

In a significant development, Iran’s response expanded beyond military targets to strike at one of the symbolic pillars of Israel’s strategic project: the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot.

Long-range Iranian missiles targeted the institute, widely regarded as the intellectual core of Israel’s settler-colonial enterprise. This was no random attack. It marked a shift in the war’s objectives—where knowledge institutions became integral parts of the battleground.

During the Gaza war, Israel used artificial intelligence and social media to identify and target individuals. That precedent underscored how research institutions serve as direct feeders to surveillance and control technologies.

The Weizmann Institute is not a conventional academic body. It functions as a central knowledge bank underpinning the scientific and technological foundations of Israel’s security dominance. Its research—spanning AI, quantum computing, and biochemistry—feeds directly into surveillance, espionage, and control systems.

It maintains informal connections with Unit 8200, the Israeli army’s leading cyber intelligence unit, and serves as a training ground for tech and security elites. Alumni have gone on to develop surveillance tools used by firms like NSO Group and Paragon.

By striking Weizmann, Iran delivered a symbolic and operational blow. The war, it suggested, was no longer about terrain—it was about disrupting the very architecture of control.

This targeting of a scientific institution reveals a new Iranian awareness of the nature of conflict—one no longer confined to missiles and aircraft, but to symbols and institutions that produce technological superiority. It’s a strike at the cognitive core of hegemony, not merely its military arm.

Smartphones as a battlefield

At the same time, Iranian authorities issued urgent warnings against using popular apps, particularly WhatsApp and Instagram, urging citizens to delete them immediately.

The warnings coincided with Israeli airstrikes on nuclear facilities and research centers that killed several scientists and top commanders. Analysts linked the app alert to fears that these platforms could serve as indirect channels for leaking user data to Israel.

These fears stem from painful precedents. During the 2023 Gaza war, Israel deployed an AI program known as Lavender. It mined metadata from WhatsApp and Telegram to identify and target individuals.

Lavender became a prototype for automating mass killings, enabling thousands of drone strikes based on fragile digital clues. Iran appears to be taking that risk seriously—imposing harsh internet restrictions, disabling VPN access, and banning smart devices for government personnel.

Smartphones have become war fronts themselves. The question now is not merely whether an app is safe—but whether your phone could become a weapon against you. The war has transcended armies; it’s a war between operating systems, broadcast networks, and algorithms that determine who survives and who is targeted.

Information as ordnance

The Israel-Iran conflict has also spilled into the information space. From the moment the Israeli offensive began, the battle to shape perception—with images, videos, and narratives—became as intense as any missile exchange.

Social media was soon overwhelmed by manipulated content, including AI-generated videos like one on TikTok falsely claiming to show Israeli bombings of Iran. Within hours, over 30 misleading or recycled clips and images had appeared, amassing more than 37 million views.

One common technique involved recirculating footage from previous wars or disasters. Some viral videos were traced to the 2021 military drills or 2020 explosions, yet were presented as current scenes of combat—confusing audiences and even professional media.

Social media algorithms exacerbated the problem, promoting falsehoods at scale. Changes on X, where paid accounts now get verified regardless of credibility, further fueled disinformation.

As propaganda intensified, Israeli PM Netanyahu addressed Iranians directly online, urging them to rise against their government. Reza Pahlavi, son of the former Shah, likewise called on Iranian soldiers to defect.

In response, Iranian authorities clamped down on the internet. But billionaire Elon Musk responded by activating Starlink in Iran, allowing thousands to bypass censorship and reconnect. This revealed the massive sway that transnational tech firms now hold in shaping warfare.

In this new theater, information rivals rockets. A doctored image can demoralize, a real-time truth can tip strategic decisions. The speed and narrative control of data are now decisive tools of war.

Aerial battles begin with drones

The deployment of drones represented a new level of tactical ingenuity. No longer limited to surveillance, drones became lethal and strategic actors.

Israel shocked observers in the first hours of its strike by launching swarms of small suicide drones deep into Iran—well before conventional jets arrived. Reports suggest Israeli special forces smuggled these drones in advance and placed them near critical radar and communication hubs.

At zero hour, the drones were remotely activated, knocking out key segments of Iran’s air defense network and clearing the way for airstrikes from unexpected directions.

This tactic effectively paralyzed Iranian defenses. Radar systems failed, coordination broke down, and a combination of cheap drones and precision missiles redefined the idea of an airstrike.

Iran countered by launching over 100 drones towards Israeli targets. Although most were intercepted, several struck their marks—sending a message that Israel’s interior is not immune.

Iran demonstrated that volume can outmatch sophistication when drones are used in continuous waves that overload defenses. What began as a supporting tool has become central to both nations’ first-strike strategies.

Israel’s model is Trojan-horse stealth; Iran’s is numerical saturation. The use of drone swarms to breach digital and physical defenses may become standard in future wars.

Owning tomorrow: beyond firepower

The Israel-Iran conflict is more than just another chapter in regional confrontation—it signals a transformation in how wars are fought.

The lines have blurred between state and corporation, between soldier and algorithm, between missile and metadata. Power now lies not only in weapons stockpiles, but in those who can decipher the moment and manipulate unseen architectures.

Technology governs not only the rhythm of combat but the parameters of peace. The urgent question today isn’t how to stop the next war—it’s how to prevent its tools from hijacking the world before we even notice.