Defence doctrines of the past won't work. The nature of internet-related crime is unique
There has been much to welcome in the government's recent interventions on the wonders and risks of cyberspace, from William Hague's plan for a cyber commission and George Osborne's Google speech, to armed forces minister Nick Harvey's announcement this week on new research led by the Ministry of Defence.
They have at least pushed cyber issues up the agenda. But Harvey should be far more ambitious, and positive, in his thinking on security strategies for cyberspace (Battlefield of the future, 31 May).
Cybercrime, cyberterrorism, cyber-espionage and cyberwar are not "simply crime, terrorism, espionage or war by other means", as Harvey says.
There is always a degree of continuity in any change, however radical. But the nature of cyberspace means that imposing the old doctrines that served our defence will not work. Until we recognise that, we risk succumbing to a dangerous degree of cyber complacency.
The transnational cyber environment is largely impervious to inherited legal frameworks. For instance, it is a great leap to assume that a cyber-attack would fit neatly within the UN charter's definition of "armed attack". Moreover, the cyber world's diffuse empowerment of individuals, corporations and non-state actors can render traditional political structures and approaches impotent.
So it is hard to agree with Harvey's assertion that "existing international frameworks can be applied to cyberspace too". It took a few gossipy tweets to put a new kind of strain on the constitutional relationship between the UK's parliamentarians and its judiciary. A confrontation between sovereign states in cyberspace would not be smoothed over so quickly, even if we knew how. All of this is developing by the minute ? and we are far behind the curve.
The question is not whether we institute "wholly separate doctrines", which Harvey dismisses as a "temptation", but whether we can develop doctrines which address and encompass this new environment and all who act in it ? going beyond traditional defence boundaries.
Our approach to business in the public, private and even personal sphere needs to change radically: in developing coherent doctrines and concepts that extend well beyond the military and the state; in organising our capabilities; and in our approach to innovation.
The cyber world, including the internet, brings huge benefits and opportunities. It can cut resource waste, open new business markets, expand learning and understanding, strengthen citizen politics, and bring many other social, educational and information advantages. All of which could sow a wide and deep resilience ? which is as much about creativity and innovation spurring social and economic growth as it is about research to defend our way of life.
Human ingenuity unleashed cyberspace, and human ingenuity can shape it for good while minimising the downside. But it is late in the day. It has to start now. And it starts with the recognition that these are not just the same old problems in a different guise.
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/03/defence-counter-cyberterrorism-threat
LIBERTY GLOBAL LM ERICSSON LOGITECH INTERNATIONAL MCAFEE MAXIMUS
No comments:
Post a Comment