Couldn’t most hacking attempts be defined as “hostile actions”? And the second part “at a time of peace or war” effectively means all the time. Seems like an extremely broad exclusion.
Yea, I thought that too. I imagine either the "or warlike" part or additional text that was not quoted narrows it down to state actors or state-like actors (e.g. terror groups like ISIS or al-Qaida). Would still be a very broad definition.
I have no idea how the law would interpret it, but while 'hostile warlike act' might narrow the scope as you suggest, 'hostile or warlike act' would seem to widen the scope to any hostile act, warlike or not. (Are there any non-hostile warlike acts? Accidents such as so-called 'friendly fire' incidents might fit...)
