# Legal, Economic and Cyber Security Framework Considerations for Drone Usage
## 3 Hypothesis and Objectives  
The research presented above encompasses the risks and preventive measures concerning drone usage from only one vantage point: security, legal, or economy, without analyzing the interplay between these different angles. The use of drones creates certain cyber-attack risks that can be addressed from a technical, economical or legal standpoint. To this end, the existing research does not analyze the impact of preventive technical measures on the legal and economic aspects or the legal provisions on the economic and technical aspects.  
In this paper, we build on the existing literature and explore further and in depth this interplay between the tree angles in order to provide useful solutions to creating drones (and a drone lifecycle) that lead to reduced cyber security risks and increased trust of users/business entities in the use of drones in a wide spectrum of sectors and activities.  
To this end, the objective of this article is, after correlation between types of cyber-attacks, legal and economic implications thereof, to include the description of gaps in legislation that should be addressed (for preventive measures and liability in case of cyber-attacks). This proposal also reflects the view of respondents with regard to a questionnaire on these aspects relating to liability for economic damages and preventive measures to be taken. This entails the following research objectives:  
**Objective 1 (O1).**: _Identifify the view of the respondents in terms of liability for certain types of cyber-attacks._
**Objective 2 (O2).**: _Identifify the view of the respondents on preventive measures for the actions covered under Objectives 1 and 2._
**Objective 3 (O3).**: _Identifify the costs drone users consider useful to incur (either directly or indirectly) in order to ensure safe usage of drone in terms of preventing cyber-attacks and mitigating cyber-attack damages._  
For the above objectives, the below hypotheses are explored in this research paper:  
**Hypothesis 1 (H1).**: _(Regarding O1)--For preventing DDoS attacks, the drone cyber security solution is considered liable._  
**Hypothesis 2 (H2).**: _(Regarding O2)--A failsafe mechanism to land the drone safely is considered the best option for preventive measures in case of a DDoS attack and other exploitation of vulnerabilities._  
**Hypothesis 3 (H3).**: _(Regarding O2)--A certification mechanism should be implemented for any changes made by the user to the drone software._  
**Hypothesis 4 (H4).**: _(Regarding O1)--The drone user is liable for any changes it makes to the drone software._  
**Hypothesis 5 (H5).**: _(Regarding O2)--The drone should automatically install needed updates when on the ground and should not fly without these._  
**Hypothesis 6 (H6).**: _(Regarding O1)--The drone software producer is liable for not installing updates timely and properly._  
**Hypothesis 7 (H7).** (_Regarding O1_)--_The drone software producer is liable for vulnerabilities in the drone software._  
**Hypothesis 8 (H8).** (_Regarding O3_)--Respondents are of the view that certain technical and organizational measures have to be implemented by the stakeholders involved in the drone production/distribution cycle even if these may be reflected as an indirect cost in the drone purchasing and maintenance cost._  
**Hypothesis 9 (H9).** (_Regarding O3_)--Respondents are of the view that certain organizational measures are to be taken by the drone users for the cyber-safety of the drone, even if this adds to the usage complexity and may impact timing for drone usage._