Publié par : pintejp | février 1, 2012

« Cyber-security: The vexed question of global rules »

This report is made up of a survey of some 250 leading authorities worldwide and of interviews carried out in late 2011 and early 2012 with over 80 cyber-security experts in government, companies, international organisations and academia. It offers a global snapshot of current thinking about the cyber-threat and the measures that should be taken to defend against it, and assesses the way ahead. It is aimed at the influential layperson, and deliberately avoids specialised language.
For the moment, the “bad guys” have the upper hand – whether they are attacking systems for industrial or political espionage reasons, or simply to steal money – because the lack of international agreements allows them to operate swiftly and mostly with impunity. Protecting data and systems against cyber-attack has so far been about dousing the flames, although
recently the focus has been shifting towards more assertive self-protection.
The preparation of this report has been greatly helped by Robert Lentz’s framework for measuring levels of cyber-security in governments and private companies. Lentz is President and CEO of Cyber Security Strategies,
and has 34 years experience working for the U.S. government. His Cyber Security Maturity Model explains the five stages towards resilience against cyber-attack, through conventional threat to advanced persistent threat, and was used as the measurement tool for our country-by-country stress test in the second part of the report.
Even if everyone accepts the need for standards, rules, laws, codes of conduct and maybe even a global treaty to protect cyber-space against cyber-crime, not everyone agrees on how to get there. The debate is also about who should make the rules, and to what extent dominance by the military is a good or a bad thing. The fact that cyber-space knows no borders implies that cyber-security is only as good as its weakest link, and that something must be done about unregulated countries that can offer a haven for cyber-criminals.
The first part of this two-part report concentrates on the main issues that are slowing progress, starting with the absence of agreement on what we mean by terms like cyber-war or cyber-attack. It reflects sharp divisions over the rights of individuals and states in cyber-space. Most Western countries believe that freedom of access to the internet is a basic human
right, and that he or she also has a right to privacy and security that should be protected by laws. UNESCO argues that the right to assemble in cyberspace comes under Article 19 of the Declaration of Human Rights.

Accéder au rapport complet

Laisser un commentaire

Choisissez une méthode de connexion pour poster votre commentaire:


Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Déconnexion / Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Google+

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Google+. Déconnexion / Changer )

Connexion à %s


%d blogueurs aiment cette page :