In the highly contested global cyber environment, coordinating with the various legal systems around the world poses a formidable challenge. The conflicting rules and regulations of different countries hinders the smooth execution of cyber intelligence operations. The discrepancy in data protection laws between the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the United States' varying state-level regulations has led to challenges in data sharing and collaboration. A real world example is how different countries approach surveillance methods in public places. In Europe, there is a higher expectation for the government to protect the privacy of the general public. In the United States, there is a bigger emphasis put on security. For intelligence purposes, this can cause problems as it can become more difficult to track the movements of individuals and objects.

The imperative for international cooperation in cyber intelligence operations underscores the need for cohesive legal agreements. The Stuxnet worm incident provides a tangible example of the challenges arising from the absence of a universally accepted legal framework. The Stuxnet attack, attributed to state-sponsored actors, targeted Iran's nuclear facilities and raised questions about the legality and accountability of such cyber operations on the global stage(Farwell and Rohozinski, 2011). In international forums, countries are held to a much higher standard than individuals. This means that it is easier for state sponsored actors and other small criminal groups to advance military goals without being bound by traditional laws or regulations.