Sam Spencer

Butler 2021
1/19/21
Cybersecurity

Cybersecurity’s future, and it’s threat to democracy.

When people refer to cybersecurity, they are typically speaking on the practice of defending

against cyberattacks, or on a larger scale, cyberwarfare. Every couple of weeks it appears that

there is some sensitivity, whether it be in the private sector or in the government, with an

information system and passwords may have gotten leaked. We think of computer science

teachers telling freshmen and sophomores that it is safest to constantly change passwords

because of the constant threat posed by those who cybersecurity directly targets. What they

typically do not think of is the massive amounts of security systems within more authoritarian

governments that inhibit the freedom of internet access for the benefit of safety of valuable

information systems. For example, China is a known censor of large portions of the internet

simply because it is either a known risk factor or they use that justification to hide ulterior

motives. Although these security measures are certainly far more powerful than the ones

currently in the US and UK, they also inhibit one of the core tenants of democracy: liberty in all

accords. Though it is important to develop cybersecurity technologies further, it is important to

ensure that it is not done in such a hostile fashion as to develop an environment that would

inhibit the people’s access to the internet.

There is a difference in certain cybersecurity measures. Some can be considered more offensive

in nature, and some would be considered primarily defensive. Mike Fleckenstein, a prominent

author in the field of data science, writes, “Data defense, the authors argue, is about minimizing
risk and is focused on data management areas such as data privacy, data security, data quality,

and data governance. Alternatively, data offense focuses on increasing the organization's

competitive position” (SciTech Lawyer 8). This difference in different methods of securing data

is a prime example of the need to develop cybersecurity methods further in order to properly

prepare for the innovative ways that hackers will attempt to use to attack sensitive databanks in

the future. In a world filled with people who will do an incredible amount to get what they want,

including attacking fragile and sensitive systems that can shatter with little effort, it is important

to understand the difference between the implications of data defense and data offense. While

data defense is the one that is primarily used by major technology companies and even the

government when protecting sensitive information, there is a rising and concerning trend

emerging in recent years, in the aptly named information era, that offensive methods begin to

become more popular. This popularity mostly comes in the form in cybersecurity’s increasing

importance in warfare, and how it is already being used in both the past and the modern day to

fight battles that are not even on the front line.

In the week of January 23rd, 2020, government documents were released that detailed the first

offensive cybersecurity measure taken and acknowledged by the US. The documents were

released to the public by the George Washington University’s National Security Archive after

they had requested the information from the government to make public. The documents detailed

events that the US took against ISIS in which they launched a cyberattack intended to

significantly reduce the amount of propaganda that was being output. This was done by taking

ISIS drives and servers offline, and this had the added benefit of gathering intelligence. Although

this was done with the intention to stop hate, it is important to take a step back and look at the

wider picture. It is a moment in which information, one of the most vital pieces of defining
freedom and the freedom to think and learn, was put under scrutiny and used against another

group. ISIS is a group that deserved this sort of treatment, but where is the line drawn? If there

are domestic groups speaking out against the government’s actions, will the government then

have just clause to take down their internet access and take their information? Although, yes, this

sort of issue may seem like a hyperbolic paranoia, it still will have merit in the years to come

during this particularly sensitive time within American history and is a discussion that is better

had sooner rather than later.

The fear of complete and utter domination of the internet by a government is not an unfounded

one. There are many instances, particularly in more authoritarian countries than that of the US or

of the UK, like China, or even Russia in a less extreme way. This domination of the internet, as

well as the rise of more offensive methods of cybersecurity, is an existentially terrifying one that

appears closer to becoming real as each day passes. Laura Rosenberger, the director of the

alliance for securing democracy, has written about this very topic and the way it threatens the

democratic process; she writes aptly, “Democratic countries view information as an empowering

force in the hands of people: the free and open flow of ideas, news, and opinion fuels

deliberative democracy. Authoritarian systems see this model as a threat, viewing information as

a danger to their regimes and something the state must control and shape” (Foreign Affairs).

Later, Rosenberger would talk specifically about instances in which said authoritarian countries

had exhibited this sort of domination onto the process, such as the potential Russian interference

in the 2016 US election, or the Chinese censorship of a lot of the Hong Kong protests on social

media. In the case of the Hong Kong protests, it is a direct result of the increased cybersecurity

measures taken by China to suppress the number of threats to their national integrity and had

then led to the very suppression of the freedoms we still debate and argue over today. Although
this does not, and hopefully will not, apply to the US, it is important to note as we step into an

unknown era, with little history to help create informed decisions. It is up to the people to decide

the power the government should have when it comes to the internet, and it depends to the years

of arguing ahead in if access to the internet is something that should be protected by the

government. However, it is reasonable to believe that there is an intrisic nature to the internet

which allows a new way to practice the freedoms of the past, making it an important thing to

protect, no matter if it is never explicitly mentioned within the constitution or bill of rights.

Although we have a pretty good idea of the limitations we currently have, it is difficult to see

how future ways of thinking could affect the thought process of getting around these limitations.

This makes seeing the future ahead an insurmountably difficult task and means that we should

address present concerns so that we can establish that baseline of understanding. This includes

looking at the potential risks that come with future development, including the potential that the

technologies take over our original way of thinking entirely. This obsession with development

and the need for safety already justifies the stripping of liberty that we hold so dear, making this

threat much worse unaddressed. However extreme it may seem, there are already instances of

this happening, in authoritarian countries like China or Russia. At what point does the US or UK

become just like that? That is the question we must ask ourselves. When are we finished

developing? Cybersecurity, in its seemingly endless development, poses a threat to democracy

unseen by the masses which is a definitive cause for concern, and a need of awareness.
 Works Consulted

Baksh, Mariam. "FBI Director: Feeding DOD's Cyber Offense Operations Is Crucial..." SIRS
Issues Researcher, 2020 Sep 24,
explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2452184093?accountid=231.
Bowcott, Owen. "Cybercrime Laws Need Urgent Reform to Protect UK, Says Report." The
Guardian (Online), 2020 Jan 22. SIRS Issues Researcher,
explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2365744064?accountid=231.
Fleckenstein, Mike. "Ingredients of a Data Strategy." Scitech Lawyer, Spring 2020, p. 8. SIRS
Issues Researcher, explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2382863820?
accountid=231.
"Newly Released Government Documents Detail U.S. Cyberoffensive on ISIS." SIRS Issues
Researcher, 2020 Jan 23, explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2353759239?
accountid=231.
Rosenberger, Laura. "Making Cyberspace Safe for Democracy." Foreign Affairs, Jan. May. SIRS
Issues Researcher, explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2415558640?
accountid=231.
Sabbagh, Dan. "Britain Has Offensive Cyberwar Capability, Top General Admits." The
Guardian (Online), 2020 Sep 25. SIRS Issues Researcher,
explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2465507984?accountid=231.