Search

Begin New Search Topic Cybersecurity Political Geography Global Focus

81. How Much Does a “Privacy” Weigh?

Author:
Paul Rosenzweig
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Fletcher Security Review
Institution:
The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:
Benjamin Franklin is famous, in part, for having said, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Though historical evidence suggests Franklin’s quote has been misinterpreted,[1] the aphorism has come to stand for the proposition that privacy and security stand in opposition to each other, where every increase in security likely results in a commensurate decrease in privacy, and vice versa. ​ Couched in those terms, the privacy/security trade-off is a grim prospect. We naturally want both privacy and security to the greatest extent possible. But Franklin tells us this is impossible — that privacy and security are locked in a zero-sum game where the gain of one comes only at the loss of the other. ​ Of course, this characterization is assuredly flawed; it is certainly possible to adopt systems that maximize both privacy and security in a Pareto optimal way. That is one of the reasons why so many privacy and security experts simply revile the “balancing” metaphor — it obscures more than it illuminates... ​
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Cybersecurity, and Privacy
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

82. An Effects-Centric Approach to Assessing Cybersecurity Risk

Author:
Charles Harry and Nancy Gallagher
Publication Date:
03-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM)
Abstract:
Faced with rapidly growing cyber threats, organizational leaders, and government officials cannot reliably secure all data and digital devices for which they are responsible. The best they can do is conduct strategic risk management. That requires a systematic way to categorize potential attacks and estimate consequences in order to set priorities, allocate resources, and mitigate losses. The 2018 U.S. National Cyber Strategy holds government officials accountable for doing cyber risk management based on the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework and recommendations from not-for-profit organizations such as the Center for Internet Security (CIS) and ISACA. Yet, none of these policy documents and best practice guides actually provide the necessary analytical tools. As a result, public agencies, private companies, and non-profit groups that try to do risk assessment often feel overwhelmed rather than empowered to make strategic cybersecurity decisions. The Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM) has developed an analytical framework that provides four essential building blocks needed to satisfy the principles in the NIST Standard Framework and other best practice guides: 1. A standardized system for classifying cyber threats and events by their effects. 2. Tools to associate organizational functions with IT topologies. 3. Algorithms to assess the severity of disruptive and exploitative cyber events. 4. A method to understand the integrated nature of risk across different parts of a simple organization, major divisions of a complex organization, or interconnected organizations in a complex system. These building blocks can be combined in different ways to answer critical questions, such as: • What is the range of cyber risks to different types of organizations? • Which threats pose the greatest risk to a specific department or organization? • How could an attack on one part of an IT network affect other organizational functions? • What is the accumulated risk across a critical infrastructure sector or geography? Using a comprehensive, consistent, and repeatable method to categorize and measure risk can enhance communication and decision-making among executives who make strategic decisions for organizations and their IT staff with day-to-day responsibility for cybersecurity. It can facilitate cooperation between public officials and private industry who share responsibility for different components of national critical infrastructure. It can inform media coverage and public debate about important policy questions, such as which decisions about cybersecurity should be purely private decisions, whether government should incentivize or mandate certain cybersecurity choices, and when a cyber attack warrants some type of military response.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Military Strategy, Cybersecurity, and Media
Political Geography:
Global Focus

83. The Influence of Commercial Space Capabilities on Deterrence

Author:
John Klein
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
Recent U.S. space policy initiatives underscore the far-reaching benefits of commercial space activities. The White House revived the National Space Council to foster closer coordination, cooperation, and exchange of technology and information among the civil, national security, and commercial space sectors.1 National Space Policy Directive 2 seeks to promote economic growth by streamlining U.S. regulations on the commercial use of space.2 While the defense community generally appreciates the value of services and capabilities derived from the commercial space sector—including space launch, Earth observation, and satellite communications—it often overlooks one area of strategic importance: deterrence.
Topic:
International Cooperation, International Affairs, and Cybersecurity
Political Geography:
Global Focus

84. BASC News

Author:
Vinod K. Aggarwal
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Berkeley APEC Study Center
Abstract:
Industrial policy in cybersecurity: Origins, evolution and implications
Topic:
International Affairs and Cybersecurity
Political Geography:
Global Focus

85. The Privatisation of Security and the Market for Cyber Tools and Services

Author:
Tim Maurer and Wyatt Hoffman
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance (DCAF)
Abstract:
This paper seeks to identify the emerging and expanding gaps in the governance of private cybersecurity companies and activities and to explore ways forward and policy options for governments. The first section of the paper will explore the characteristics of typical cyber operations and challenges related to their conduct by private actors. Section two will address the governance challenges around cybersecurity and three main departure points for regulation: the fact that geographic scope does not limit cybersecurity companies, that cyber operations can slide from defensive to offensive very quickly; and that cybersecurity services are often exported for the purpose of (or with the knowledge they will be) violating human rights. This section will also integrate perspectives of international law. Section three will lay out suggestions for policy options in relation to international law and existing international normative frameworks. In conclusion, the paper will offer a framework and way forward as food for thought in order to address cybersecurity operations in relation to PMSCs.
Topic:
International Law, Science and Technology, Cybersecurity, and Internet
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

86. Wars in the later 21st century: Forecast developments in the methods of warfare

Author:
Marcin Gornikiewicz
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security and Defence Quarterly
Institution:
War Studies University
Abstract:
Objectives: This paper attempts to forecast the future of warfare methods in the forthcoming decades of the 21st century. The predictions reflect on the current trends observed in the development of military and civil (dual-use) technologies and changes in thought constructs developed for hostilities. Methods: Empirical and theoretical research methods were utilised in the study. The research data, obtained from the review of source materials, were subsequently subjected to examination through analysis, synthesis and comparison. Results: The methods of warfare at the turn of the 21st century are likely to reflect the technological evolution of the modern age. Considering the present-day trends, there is a good probability that our technology-driven lives will transform people into hybrids of biological organisms merged with the technological environment, integrated with the body. Therefore, hostile action against human soldiers could be taken on three major levels: the biological organism, the mass communication technology integrated into the body, and the mental level – both in the conscious and the subconscious sphere. The study into how the soldier’s mental sphere can be influenced to anticipate and shape behaviours may contribute to further research on the third level impact on enemy soldiers. Conclusions: The conclusions formulated in this analysis may carry significant implications for the works on an innovative methodology of the future warfare, accounting for the technological progress in the next decades of the 21st century, and a methodology for countering future military threats.
Topic:
Science and Technology, War, International Security, Cybersecurity, History, and Military
Political Geography:
Global Focus

87. Editing Biosecurity: Needs and Strategies for Governing Genome Editing

Author:
Gregory Falco, Martin Eling, Virginia Miller, Lawrence A. Gordon, Shaun Shuxun Wang, Joan T. Schmit, Russell Thomas, Mauro Elvedi, Thomas Maillart, Emy Donavan, Simon Dejung, Matthias Weber, Eric Durand, Franklin Nutter, Uzi Scheffer, Gil Arazi, Gilbert Ohana, and Herbert Lin
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), Stanford University
Abstract:
Cyber risk as a research topic has attracted considerable academic, industry and government attention over the past 15 years. Unfortunately, research progress has been modest and has not been sufficient to answer the “call to action” in many prestigious committee and agency reports. To date, industry and academic research on cyber risk in all its complexity has been piecemeal and uncoordinated – which is typical of emergent, pre-paradigmatic fields. Further complicating matters is the multidisciplinary characteristics of cyber risk. In order to significantly advance the pace of research progress, a group of scholars, industry practitioners and policymakers from around the world present a research agenda for cyber risk and cyber insurance, which accounts for the variety of fields relevant to the problem space. We propose a cyber risk unified concept model that identifies where certain disciplines of study can add value. The concept model can also be used to identify collaboration opportunities across the major research questions. In this agenda, we unpack the major research questions into manageable projects and tactical questions that need to be addressed.
Topic:
Security, Infrastructure, Governance, Cybersecurity, Risk, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

88. Pugwash Workshop on Cyber Security and Warfare

Author:
Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Abstract:
On 19-20 December 2018 Pugwash held a workshop in Geneva, co-sponsored and hosted by the Geneva Center for Security Policy (GCSP), on the topic of cyber security and warfare. The meeting gathered together 20 experts and practitioners from Europe, North and South America, and Asia, for a broad set of discussions. Below is a summary of some of the key points that arose over the one-and- a-half days of discussions1, followed by a list of possible areas of further future exploration.
Topic:
Security, War, Cybersecurity, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Global Focus

89. Developing a Holistic Exposure and Adaptation Testing (HEAT) Process for Election Management Bodies

Author:
Katherine Ellena and Goran Petrov
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES)
Abstract:
In a new publication, the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) outlines strategies for election management bodies (EMBs) to strengthen their technology and procedures to resist vulnerabilities, by following what we have termed a Holistic Exposure and Adaptation Testing (HEAT) process. While no electoral process or technology is infallible, the HEAT process aims to secure automated or digitalized electoral processes – as far as possible – against unanticipated threats, illicit incursions, system failures, or unfounded legal challenges. As the name suggests, the HEAT process focuses on the types of exposure an EMB may face when implementing different types of technology systems (technology, human, political, legal and procedural exposure). This process encourages a more holistic assessment of what could go wrong in data and technology management and allows the EMB to identify strategies to reduce or eliminate different types of exposure in a systematic manner. Because the HEAT process seeks to provide a holistic approach to cybersecurity in elections, we have drawn lessons from international principles, election cybersecurity case studies, risk-mitigation methodologies and technology-related election court judgments. The proposed process is also guided by international best practices on data management and cybersecurity, as well as transparency, open data and privacy.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Elections, and Cybersecurity
Political Geography:
Global Focus

90. Increasing International Cooperation in Cybersecurity and Adapting Cyber Norms

Author:
Elena Chernenko, Oleg Demidov, and Fyodor Lukyanov
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Council on Foreign Relations
Abstract:
nformation and communications technology (ICT) presents one of the most critical modern challenges to global security. Threat assessments predict that the next major international crisis could be due to a state or terrorist group weaponizing ICTs to devastate critical infrastructure or military logistics networks. The proliferation of asymmetric warfare (i.e., conflicts between nations or groups that have disparate military capabilities) has increased states’ use of ICTs, which necessitates the development of an international code of cyber conduct. There is an urgent need for cooperation among states to mitigate threats such as cybercrime, cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, electronic espionage, bulk data interception, and offensive operations intended to project power by the application of force in and through cyberspace. Emerging cyber threats could precipitate massive economic and societal damage, and international efforts need to be recalibrated to account for this new reality. A common misperception is that the principal cybersecurity threats demanding urgent international collaboration are massive, state sponsored attacks that target critical infrastructure such as power plants or electrical grids, causing massive devastation and human casualties. In fact, cyber threats are more diverse and complex, often targeting private enterprises and endangering the technical integrity of the digital world. The near-total digitalization of business models makes the global economy more vulnerable to cyberattacks, not only from states but also from criminal organizations and other nonstate actors.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, Infrastructure, and Cybersecurity
Political Geography:
Global Focus