Reuters TV

A still image taken from Israeli Defence Forces video footage shows what they say is a small unidentified aircraft shot down in a mid-air interception after it crossed into southern Israel Oct. 6, 2012.

WASHINGTON - From a suspected Israeli airstrike in Sudan to cyber warfare in the Gulf and a drone shot down over Israel, the largely hidden war between Iran and its foes seems heating up and spreading.

Despite months of speculation, most experts and governments believe the risk of a direct Israeli strike on Tehran's nuclear program stirring regional conflict has eased, at least for now. But all sides, it seems, are finding other ways to fight.

For the U.S. and European powers, the main focus remains on oil export sanctions that are inflicting ever more damage on Iran's economy.

But the Obama administration and Israel have also ploughed resources into covert operations - a campaign that now appears to have prompted an increasingly sophisticated Iranian reaction.

With Iranian hackers suspected of severely damaging Saudi oil facility computers and a suspected Hezbollah drone shot down over Israel, tactics and tools once seen as the sole purview of the United States are now clearly being used on both sides.

Report: Iran mulls 'pre-emptive attack' against Israel; commander warns of 'World War III'

The mounting body count in Syria, some believe, is also in part a consequence of the proxy war being waged there.

"In many ways, it's reminiscent of the Cold War, particularly the proxy conflicts," says Hayat Alvi, lecturer in Middle Eastern politics at the U.S. Naval War College. "But unlike in the Cold War, there are now a much larger number of asymmetrical warfare techniques. Most of this is happening behind the scenes, but in the modern world we are finding it difficult to keep them secret for that long."

Covert confrontation itself is, of course, nothing new. Foreign intelligence agencies have battled for decades to stop Iran and other states obtaining nuclear material, while Tehran and Israel have long needled each other and proxy battlegrounds, particularly in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.

IAEA: Iran not providing 'necessary cooperation' in nuclear probe

The U.S. and Israel are widely suspected of using the Stuxnet computer worm to target Iranian nuclear centrifuges. Meanwhile, most experts believe Israel's Mossad was involved in assassinations of several nuclear scientists - attacks suspected to have prompted similar bomb attacks on Israeli diplomats in India, Georgia and Thailand and tourists in Bulgaria.

Hezbollah drone shot down
But it does seem to be escalating. What Tehran is trying to do now, most analysts believe, is in part further retaliation. But its rulers may also be indicating that the Islamic Republic now has a range of new and potentially damaging options in reserve should its nuclear facilities be bombed.

The penetration of Israeli airspace by an unmanned drone apparently operated by Lebanese militant group Hezbollah - a long-term Iranian ally - was, perhaps, one of the clearest examples so far.

Hezbollah admits launching drone over Israel

The drone was shot down by Israel's military in the vicinity of its main nuclear facility at Dimona.

Iran has long been believed to be putting resources into a drone program and may have gathered useful tips after a classified U.S. Sentinel stealth drone came down in the country last year. While the Hezbollah drone was unarmed, a attack with multiple drones laden with explosives might prove harder to stop.

The dramatic spike in suspected Iranian cyber attacks this year also has some in the U.S. distinctly worried. While direct denial of service attacks on U.S. banks - widely seen as retaliation for U.S. sanctions and attempts to freeze Iran from the international financial system - were seen relatively simplistic, attacks on U.S. allies in the Gulf were more complex.

The most worrying, experts say, were those on Saudi oil firm Aramco and Qatari gas export facilities. Last month, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta described the Saudi attack as the most sophisticated yet launched on a private company, effectively destroying tens of thousands of computers - although he stopped short of blaming Tehran directly.

Iranian officials have tended to deny involvement. But they say they have continued to come under cyber attack themselves with systems at Iran's own oil facilities, communications and infrastructure firms suffering problems last month.

"The problem is that these are secret forms of warfare that are rarely, if ever, discussed publicly," a veteran former CIA official and now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute told an event last month. "And yet the implications could be colossal. What do we do, for example, if it turns out the Iranians can shut down the entire Saudi oil production."

Sending a message
In the absence of direct face-to-face negotiations, such actions can also be a diplomatic tool in their own right.

"The cyber attacks and Hezbollah drone both represent an escalation from the Iranian camp," says Ariel Ratner, a former Obama administration political appointees at the State Department and now fellow for the Truman National Security Foundation. "But a lot of what is going on here is a matter of signaling to each other."

That might also in part explain a suspected Israeli airstrike on the outskirts of the Sudanese capital Khartoum on October 23 that caused a major fire at Sudan's Yarmouk arms factory.

"Israel is flexing its muscles militarily and also sending a message to Tehran and Washington that it will not hesitate to use force to defend itself," says Bilal Saab, director of the Institute for near East and Gulf Military Analysis based in the United Arab Emirates and Washington D.C.. "It was a show of force meant to send political messages and achieve precise and immediate military objectives, those being the prevention of Iranian shipment of sensitive hardware to its proxies."

Israel refused to comment after Sudanese officials said four of its aircraft conducted the attack. U.S. officials would not comment on what they believed happened, but spy agencies have long suspected Iran of smuggling weaponry into Eritrea and Sudan and across Egypt to Hamas militants in Gaza.

Source: Back-channel talks but no US-Iran deal on one-to-one nuclear meeting

Last week's four-day visit to Sudan by two Iranian warships - coming mere days after the arms factory attack - appeared an unusually public show of solidarity between two nations. Some suspect Israel is also raising its support for South Sudan, which gained its independence last year and has since teetered on the brink of conflict with Khartoum.

Arab divisions
The much more significant proxy confrontations, however, remain in the region itself. Israel is taking something of a back foot in the conflict in Syria - its officials saying any support they might give for anti-Assad rebels would be counter-productive - but Iran's Arab rivals are not.

For Washington, rolling back Tehran's influence in Syria is seen as a distinctly secondary goal to stopping - or at least limiting - the bloodshed.

For Saudi Arabia and Qatar, however, arming the rebels, the prospect of replacing the Shiite Alawite rule of Bashar al-Assad with a Sunni majority government with no Iranian links is seen as a key motivation.

Slideshow: Everyday life in Iran

At schools, in shops, and on the streets of big cities and small towns, daily life plays out in Iran.

Launch slideshow

The war there is already seen destabilizing neighboring Lebanon, while the body count in Iraq has also been creeping back up as violence between Sunni groups and sometimes Tehran-backed Shiites.

The Sunni leadership of almost all of the Gulf states have long suspected Iran of stirring up dissent among their Shiite populations, although Western diplomats suspect such claims are overstated. Some worry Washington is already being dragged onto one side in a growing regional blood feud.

Tehran may step up its attempts to destabilize neighbors, particularly if it believes its enemies are trying to do the same. Washington recently removed Iranian militant opposition group MEK from its list of terrorist groups, potentially opening the door to covert co-operation. To work with it on attacks within the country, however, might produce a violent response.

Last year, U.S. officials said they had foiled an Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington by bombing a restaurant in Washington DC. That, some security experts said, suggested Iran was increasingly willing to take serious risks - although others said the entire tale sounded too far-fetched.

"It's very easy to look at these events and tie them together in some kind of straightforward narrative," says Henry Smith, Middle East analyst for London-based consultancy Control Risks. "But in reality, things are likely to be far more complex."

More world stories from NBC News:

• Analysis: From Afghanistan to Venezuela, 2012 battle captivates
• Analysis: Despite bloodshed,White House candidates ignore Mexico
• Analysis: US loses patience with Syria opposition group
• Analysis: Suspicion of US rife as Romney, Obama batter China
• Meet Afghan female rapper, colonel who defy the odds
• Analysis: Israel, Iran name checks illustrate America's twin obsessions
• Chinese say one child is enough as Beijing weighs end of policy
• Analysis: Should next US president treat Russia as friend or foe?
• Expert: Tourists threaten Sistine Chapel's famous paintings

Follow World News from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

NBC News

If cyberspace itself is now a weapon of mass destruction, how can we protect ourselves from an electronic Armageddon? That’s one of the many disconcerting questions raised by a major new report just published in Europe.

Cyber crime, cyber terrorism and cyber espionage are not just overused buzzwords in the online world but are the next big threats to our security, say the experts. The theater of war, it seems, now includes cyberattacks. Scare-mongering or actual fact? Take a look at the increasing number of summits and reports dedicated to determining the global threat and make your own mind up.

The Belgium-based think-tank Security & Defence Agenda (SDA) has produced a large-scale flagship report based on 80 interviews with senior specialists and 250 experts from around the world and attempts to answer the unanswerable: how to govern cyberspace. The author of the report, Brigitte Grauman, approached this from a global perspective.

"What sets this report apart from others," she says, "is that it provides a snapshot of the latest thinking on cybersecurity from around the world." The report also tackles the thorny issue of how prepared governments and the experts are to deal with a major attack. 

How real is the threat?
Here’s some number-crunching: There are 1 million new viruses a year, says McAfee, the Internet security company. Israel alone says it sees a 1,000 attacks a minute. Online fraud, apparently, dwarfs any other kind of fraud. In the report, 38 percent of respondents polled said missile defense is as important as cyber defense, and only a slightly smaller percentage feel it is more so.

Isaac Ben-Israel, a senior Israeli security adviser quoted in the report, compares this threat to a conventional war. "If you want to hit a country, you hit its power and water supplies," he says, "Cyber technology can do this without a single bullet."

The fear of this damage plus the increase in online attacks has made political leaders in the U.S., the European Union and parts of Asia take note. The report by the SDA points out that the U.S. was certainly alarmed enough during George W. Bush's presidency; he tried unsuccessfully to regulate and monitor the Internet under the Patriot Act. The U.S. is far from alone in its concerns and the experts say that every country probably has some method for dealing with online threats.

Defining "cyber war"
The report grapples with the threats becoming an all-out "cyber war," a contentious and heavily debated term because of the images it conjures up and the level at which it makes alarm bells ring. None more so than in the days and months after Osama Bin Laden’s death, when there was much chatter about electronic jihad becoming the new front in terrorism. The sense that a worn-down Al-Qaeda, long using the Internet to radicalize, recruit and provide the training to build weapons, would soon use it for cyber warfare has certainly had authorities in the UK prepare themselves for what they believe is a growth in the threat of cyber terrorism.

So in the middle of potential cyber catastrophe, where is the global regulatory body? Many argue that this is neither pragmatic nor enforceable. In the report some say that a big event, a "cyber 9/11" would galvanize hesitant authorities. But Stewart Baker, formerly with the Department of Homeland Security, says a global body would be "a waste of time." 

The other big hurdles this body would face are the conflicting motives of countries around the world. Certainly in Russia, terrorism is a real and constant threat to the regime — but so is social networking. Yet another dilemma for those searching for solutions.

"Governments that don’t like free speech on the Internet are going to put us in the position of choosing between free speech and cybersecurity," says Baker in the SDA report.

A global solution?
Despite the challenges ahead, Grauman argues in the report that a global problem needs a global strategy. "We need to establish a rule book," she says, "a treaty, or global code of conduct and do it step-by-step with the UN or OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) pushing these measures."

In March, thousands of global security experts will gather to brain-storm possible solutions online. It would be an understatement to say they have a difficult path to navigate; the real answers may not come for months or even years. One of the striking issues raised by the report is that for all the soul-searching, privacy is not a priority for all. When Sony was hacked and 77 million clients had their private details exposed, the PlayStation's online service closed down for two weeks. According to the report, young users were more upset they could not play games than they were about the breach of their privacy. It begs the question; would future generations thank us for restricting that which should provide increasing freedom and choice? 

It’s not just for the specialists, government leaders and businesses to look for answers. If we’re to avoid the stuff of disaster movies, calamity on an unprecedented scale, nightmare scenarios of countries coming to a complete standstill with national security on its knees, experts say there are little acts we can all do; every one of us can become more aware of our home and work computers, protecting ourselves individually for a greater gain.

One of the founding fathers of the internet Vint Cerf has famously gone so far as to suggest a far more dramatic solution; a massive reboot and starting all over again with greater regulation, a clean slate with Internet 2.

It's a notion so wild that even Hollywood couldn’t dream it up.

You can reach NBC News' Tazeen Ahmad on Twitter or on Facebook.

More on cybersecurity and online threats from msnbc.com:

• Most radicalism linked to Internet, say UK lawmakers
• Senate: Bigger US role in corporate cybersecurity
• VeriSign, at Web's core, is hacked: What does it mean to you?