This last October we saw more countries than ever participate in initiatives to raise cybersecurity awareness. What was once largely a US approach has evolved into events and initiatives around the world by governments, civil society groups, and private sector partners.
In December, the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) brought the world together to talk about the internet. I tend to take a definite interest in cybersecurity, but there were many more important topics discussed. They ranged from diversity in the technology sector through to philosophy in the digital age. Cybersecurity was, nonetheless, a major theme.
Rapid cyberattacks like Petya and WannaCrypt have reset our expectations on the speed and scope of damage that a cyberattack can inflict. The Microsoft Enterprise Cybersecurity Group Detection and Response team worked extensively to help customers respond to and recover from these kinds of attacks.
This post is authored by Gene Burrus, Assistant General Counsel. As cybercrime becomes ever more pervasive, the need for states to devote law enforcement resources to battling the problem is apparent. However, states should beware using cybercrime legislation and enforcement resources as a vehicle for restricting speech or controlling content.
The recent revision of the National Standards and Technology Institute’s (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework and the publication of European Network and Security Agency’s (ENISA) proposals on implementation of the Network and Information Security (NIS) Directive have made me pause and ponder the progress made (or indeed not) in securing our critical infrastructures since they were both
Earlier this year, my team and I had the great privilege and pleasure of spending several days in Japan, participating in the Information Technology Promotion Agency (IPA) Symposium.
In some of my recent discussions with policy-makers, network separation, e.g. the physical isolation of sensitive networks from the Internet, has been floated as an essential cybersecurity tool. Why? It promises the holy grail of security, i.e. 100% protection, because cyberattacks can’t cross the “air gap” to reach their target.
Often in dangerous situations we initially look outwards and upwards for the greatest threats. Sometimes we should instead be looking inwards and downwards. Supply chain security in information and communication technology (ICT) is exactly one of those situations where detailed introspection could be of benefit to all concerned.
I recently wrote about how radical the incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) to cybersecurity will be. Technological revolutions are however frequently not as rapid as we think.
The continuing advancements of the Internet and associated technologies have brought new opportunities to governments, businesses, and private citizens. At the same time, they have also exposed them to new risks. However, Internet adoption has not been even and countries or economies have come online in different ways and at varied paces.
Are the rules and regulations being put in place today, from the Chinese cybersecurity law to the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), going to be appropriate for the world 10 years from now? And if not, should this be of concern? To answer these questions, we need to learn from the past.
The October Mirai-based IoT attack demonstrated an important and often neglected consequence of technology’s expansion into every aspect of our daily lives, as well as into the systems that underpin our economies and societies.
