Error correction at parse time
Consensus here seems to support my impression that the apostrophes in the title flapped onto the wrong word.
Cyberweapon is a simple concept, not requiring quote marks.. Your granny could understand you if you told her it was something which blocked the intertubes. Now this 'research' may be a good weapon, or an ineffective one, but neither of those appraisals require quoting, Neither would the absence of some empirical 'proof of concept'. That would mean for example, always writing 'expedition to Mars' or 'Higgs boson' until such things manifest. Maybe the quotes are really insinuating this thingy is a piece of disinformation, but if so, the story is then in the comments, not the article.
OTOH the occurrence of boffin cries out for quotes, e.g, it wasn't a real boffin involved, but a trainee wanna-be; or again, it is so far a conjecture rather than an experimental result, so its author is less like a boffin and more like an airy-fairy arts grad. Or have I hit the sematics of your NaN here?