DOCSLIB.ORG

The Effectiveness of Surveillance Technology: What Intelligence Officials Are Saying

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Effectiveness of Surveillance Technology: What Intelligence Officials Are Saying Delft University of Technology The effectiveness of surveillance technology What intelligence officials are saying Cayford, Michelle; Pieters, Wolter DOI 10.1080/01972243.2017.1414721 Publication date 2018 Document Version Final published version Published in Information Society Citation (APA) Cayford, M., & Pieters, W. (2018). The effectiveness of surveillance technology: What intelligence officials are saying. Information Society, 34(2), 88-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2017.1414721 Important note To cite this publication, please use the final published version (if applicable). Please check the document version above. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons. Takedown policy Please contact us and provide details if you believe this document breaches copyrights. We will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. This work is downloaded from Delft University of Technology. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to a maximum of 10. THE INFORMATION SOCIETY 2018, VOL. 34, NO. 2, 88–103 https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2017.1414721 The effectiveness of surveillance technology: What intelligence officials are saying Michelle Cayford and Wolter Pieters Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY In recent years, Western governments have come under sharp criticism for their use of surveillance Received 5 October 2016 technology. They have been accused of sweeping up massive amounts of information without Accepted 27 November 2017 evidence of the technologies being effective in improving security. The view of critics is clear, but what do intelligence officials themselves say? This paper analyzes statements of intelligence officials in the U.S. and U.K. from 2006 to 2016, examines what criteria officials use in their discourse on effectiveness, and investigates how considerations of cost and proportionality factor into the equation. It identifies seven measures of effectiveness in the statements of intelligence officials, and finds that cost, though rarely discussed, is the driver behind formalized evaluations of surveillance programs. Introduction approach is not to question the truth of what officials say, nor to judge actual effectiveness, but to delve into Surveillance technology is pervasive in our society today, the meaning and significance of intelligence officials’ leading to fierce debate between proponents and oppo- statements, to identify values they place on effectiveness nents. Government surveillance, in particular, has been and the measures they use to assess it, and their reason- brought increasingly under public scrutiny, with propo- ing. This study is not hostile to security forces, but an nents arguing that it increases security, and opponents attempt to honestly understand what considerations decrying its invasion of privacy. Since the Snowden leaks, intelligence officials take into account when they speak critics have loudly accused governments of employing about the effectiveness of surveillance technology. surveillance technologies that sweep up massive amounts Because so much surrounding surveillance technology is of information, intruding on the privacy of millions, but controversial, how it is discussed matters. with little to no evidence of success. And yet, evaluating The paper proceeds as follows: after briefly addressing whether surveillance technology increases security is a related work, terminology is defined and the research difficult task. How does one measure the value of one bit methods of this study are described. Thereafter what of intelligence that contributes to the greater whole? intelligence officials are saying about effectiveness of sur- How do we measure the role of intelligence in informing veillance technology is examined. Next, statements about decision-makers? cost are analyzed to understand how officials factor it This paper focuses on what intelligence officials in the into their assessments is followed by an analysis of what U.S. and U.K. themselves say about the effectiveness of they are saying with regard to proportionality. Lastly, surveillance technology. In their own words, what are officials’ statements regarding effectiveness, cost, and the criteria for evaluating whether a particular piece of proportionality are considered together and critiqued, surveillance technology meets the goal that motivated its and recommendations offered for a more holistic deployment? Even in the absence of explicit evaluations, approach. intelligence bodies must constantly make judgments about effectiveness to determine if they will continue to use and redeploy a particular surveillance technology. Related Work This evaluation of effectiveness may be implicit, but it is there. This section covers the parts within the broad literature This study does not examine the veracity of officials’ on security and surveillance literature that are most rele- statements, nor does it determine whether or not a par- vant to this paper. One of these is the privacy and secu- ticular surveillance technology is actually effective. Our rity debate, which has been at the forefront in recent CONTACT Michelle Cayford [email protected] Safety and Security Science, TU Delft, P.O. Box 5015, Delft, NL 2600GA. Published with license by Taylor & Francis © Michelle Cayford and Wolter Pieters THE INFORMATION SOCIETY 89 years. Here, the issue of effectiveness is central, as the study by van Dongen (2015) constructs a new framework basis for arguing for the use of any given surveillance for evaluating counterterrorism policies and examines program must be that it is effective in increasing security. whether there is a relation between the type of terrorist Moreover, any proportionality judgment must consider organization and the effectiveness of the counterterror- the privacy intrusion of the program against its effective- ism approaches applied to combating it. ness. This literature can be classified into three catego- There are some government-related reports that ries: 1) actual effectiveness 2) belief of effectiveness and address the question of the actual effectiveness of secu- 3) statements of effectiveness. rity measures. They include two in-depth reports by the Many authors have written on the privacy concerns U.S. Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board raised by the intersection of government surveillance (PCLOB), which discuss measures of effectiveness used and modern technology (e.g. Greenwald 2014, Berghel by intelligence officials and present the Board’s own con- 2013, Morgan 2014, Monahan 2016, Bigo et al. 2013). clusions about the effectiveness of NSA surveillance pro- Some of these authors accuse Western democracies of grams (PCLOB, Jan. 2014 and July 2014). Another exaggerating the threat of terrorism to justify mass sur- report by the Congressional Research Service makes veillance (e.g. Greenwald 2014) and also of exaggerating some rather obvious points, such as increased expendi- its role in preventing terrorist activity (e.g. Bergen et al., tures in counterterrorism does not necessarily result in 2014). progress (Perl, 2007). A study of the U.S. Department of Homeland Secur- One way to evaluate the actual effectiveness of surveil- ity’s fusion centers, which are meant to facilitate infor- lance technology is a cost-benefit analysis. Mueller and mation sharing among relevant government agencies, Stewart (2011) use risk assessment to determine the risk finds that there is confusion regarding legal and account- of a terrorist attack and then gauge whether the costs of ability frameworks that should be followed, resulting in security measures are outweighed by the benefitofa mission creep and privacy violations (Regan & likely-prevented attack. They argue that the enormous Monahan, 2013). Another study on these fusion centers amounts of spending in the U.S. on anti-terrorist meas- finds not only that mission creep occurs and thereby ures far outweigh the benefits gained. In the law enforce- potential privacy violations, but also that the centers are ment realm Edwards et al. (2014) point to a lack of ineffective in their primary tasks of information aware- evaluation of online data mining technology. Hewitt ness and sharing (Monahan & Palmer 2009). Ineffective- (2014) looks at the actual effectiveness of law enforce- ness at achieving initial goals leads to subsequent efforts ment tactics for dealing with the various types of terror- to make the centers useful and effective in other ways, ism in America and concludes that whether or not and thereby mission creep occurs with changes in cen- different types of tactics are effective depends on the ters’ tasks. type of terrorism. Additionally, Ekblom (2010), develops The largest number of studies on effectiveness exam- a framework for crime prevention and security in the ine the actual effectiveness of surveillance technology – community and Sproles (1999), a method for establish- assessments and measurements of whether or not a given ing measures of effectiveness that can be applied to any security program accomplishes its security goal. There is field. a significant body of work on evaluation of the effective- A small body of work deals with the actual effective- ness of counterterrorism measures. Lum et
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report and Accounts 2018-19
    National Crime Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2018-19 HC 2397 National Crime Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2018-19 Annual Report presented to Parliament pursuant to paragraph 8(2) of Schedule 2 to the Crime and Courts Act 2013. Accounts presented to the House of Commons pursuant to Section 6(4) of the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000. Accounts presented to the House of Lords by Command of Her Majesty. Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 22 July 2019. HC 2397 © Crown copyright 2019 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/official-documents. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to National Crime Agency, Command Suite, Unit 1, Spring Gardens, Tinworth Street, London, SE11 5EN. ISBN 978-1-5286-1296-8 CCS0519221654 07/19 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Contents Foreword by the Home Secretary 7 Part Two – Accountability Report Part One – Performance Report Corporate Governance Report 43 Directors’ Report 43 Statement by the Director General 9 Statement of Accounting Officer’s Who we are and what we do 10 responsibilities 44 How
    [Show full text]
  • Serious and Organised Crime Strategy
    Serious and Organised Crime Strategy Cm 8715 Serious and Organised Crime Strategy Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for the Home Department by Command of Her Majesty October 2013 Cm 8715 £21.25 © Crown copyright 2013 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www. nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or e-mail: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us [email protected] You can download this publication from our website at https://www.gov.uk/government/ publications ISBN: 9780101871525 Printed in the UK by The Stationery Office Limited on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ID 2593608 10/13 33233 19585 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. Contents Home Secretary Foreword 5 Executive Summary 7 Introduction 13 Our Strategic Response 25 PURSUE: Prosecuting and disrupting serious and 27 organised crime PREVENT: Preventing people from engaging 45 in serious and organised crime PROTECT: Increasing protection against 53 serious and organised crime PREPARE: Reducing the impact of serious and 65 organised crime Annex A: Accountability, governance and funding 71 Annex B: Departmental roles and responsibilities for 73 tackling serious and organised crime 4 Serious and Organised Crime Strategy Home Secretary Foreword 5 Home Secretary Foreword The Relentless Disruption of Organised Criminals Serious and organised crime is a threat to our national security and costs the UK more than £24 billion a year.
    [Show full text]
  • Report Legal Research Assistance That Can Make a Builds
    EUROPEAN DIGITAL RIGHTS A LEGAL ANALYSIS OF BIOMETRIC MASS SURVEILLANCE PRACTICES IN GERMANY, THE NETHERLANDS, AND POLAND By Luca Montag, Rory Mcleod, Lara De Mets, Meghan Gauld, Fraser Rodger, and Mateusz Pełka EDRi - EUROPEAN DIGITAL RIGHTS 2 INDEX About the Edinburgh 1.4.5 ‘Biometric-Ready’ International Justice Cameras 38 Initiative (EIJI) 5 1.4.5.1 The right to dignity 38 Introductory Note 6 1.4.5.2 Structural List of Abbreviations 9 Discrimination 39 1.4.5.3 Proportionality 40 Key Terms 10 2. Fingerprints on Personal Foreword from European Identity Cards 42 Digital Rights (EDRi) 12 2.1 Analysis 43 Introduction to Germany 2.1.1 Human rights country study from EDRi 15 concerns 43 Germany 17 2.1.2 Consent 44 1 Facial Recognition 19 2.1.3 Access Extension 44 1.1 Local Government 19 3. Online Age and Identity 1.1.1 Case Study – ‘Verification’ 46 Cologne 20 3.1 Analysis 47 1.2 Federal Government 22 4. COVID-19 Responses 49 1.3 Biometric Technology 4.1 Analysis 50 Providers in Germany 23 4.2 The Convenience 1.3.1 Hardware 23 of Control 51 1.3.2 Software 25 5. Conclusion 53 1.4 Legal Analysis 31 Introduction to the Netherlands 1.4.1 German Law 31 country study from EDRi 55 1.4.1.1 Scope 31 The Netherlands 57 1.4.1.2 Necessity 33 1. Deployments by Public 1.4.2 EU Law 34 Entities 60 1.4.3 European 1.1. Dutch police and law Convention on enforcement authorities 61 Human Rights 37 1.1.1 CATCH Facial 1.4.4 International Recognition Human Rights Law 37 Surveillance Technology 61 1.1.1.1 CATCH - Legal Analysis 64 EDRi - EUROPEAN DIGITAL RIGHTS 3 1.1.2.
    [Show full text]
  • The Right to Privacy and the Future of Mass Surveillance’
    ‘The Right to Privacy and the Future of Mass Surveillance’ ABSTRACT This article considers the feasibility of the adoption by the Council of Europe Member States of a multilateral binding treaty, called the Intelligence Codex (the Codex), aimed at regulating the working methods of state intelligence agencies. The Codex is the result of deep concerns about mass surveillance practices conducted by the United States’ National Security Agency (NSA) and the United Kingdom Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ). The article explores the reasons for such a treaty. To that end, it identifies the discriminatory nature of the United States’ and the United Kingdom’s domestic legislation, pursuant to which foreign cyber surveillance programmes are operated, which reinforces the need to broaden the scope of extraterritorial application of the human rights treaties. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the US and UK foreign mass surveillance se practices interferes with the right to privacy of communications and cannot be justified under Article 17 ICCPR and Article 8 ECHR. As mass surveillance seems set to continue unabated, the article supports the calls from the Council of Europe to ban cyber espionage and mass untargeted cyber surveillance. The response to the proposal of a legally binding Intelligence Codexhard law solution to mass surveillance problem from the 47 Council of Europe governments has been so far muted, however a soft law option may be a viable way forward. Key Words: privacy, cyber surveillance, non-discrimination, Intelligence Codex, soft law. Introduction Peacetime espionage is by no means a new phenomenon in international relations.1 It has always been a prevalent method of gathering intelligence from afar, including through electronic means.2 However, foreign cyber surveillance on the scale revealed by Edward Snowden performed by the United States National Security Agency (NSA), the United Kingdom Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) and their Five Eyes partners3 1 Geoffrey B.
    [Show full text]
  • Mass Surveillance
    Thematic factsheet1 Update: July 2018 MASS SURVEILLANCE The highly complex forms of terrorism require States to take effective measures to defend themselves, including mass monitoring of communications. Unlike “targeted” surveillance (covert collection of conversations, telecommunications and metadata by technical means – “bugging”), “strategic” surveillance (or mass surveillance) does not necessarily start with a suspicion against a particular person or persons. It has a proactive element, aimed at identifying a danger rather than investigating a known threat. Herein lay both the value it can have for security operations, and the risks it can pose for individual rights. Nevertheless, Member States do not have unlimited powers in this area. Mass surveillance of citizens is tolerable under the Convention only if it is strictly necessary for safeguarding democratic institutions. Taking into account considerable potential to infringe fundamental rights to privacy and to freedom of expression enshrined by the Convention, Member States must ensure that the development of surveillance methods resulting in mass data collection is accompanied by the simultaneous development of legal safeguards securing respect for citizens’ human rights. According to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, it would be counter to governments’ efforts to keep terrorism at bay if the terrorist threat were substituted with a perceived threat of unfettered executive power intruding into citizens’ private lives. It is of the utmost importance that the domestic legislation authorizing far-reaching surveillance techniques and prerogatives provides for adequate and sufficient safeguards in order to minimize the risks for the freedom of expression and the right to privacy which the “indiscriminate capturing of vast amounts of communications” enables.
    [Show full text]
  • Requesting a Defence from the NCA Under POCA and TACT
    Requesting a defence from the NCA under POCA and TACT UK Financial Intelligence Unit May 2019 Version 5 1 OFFICIAL OFFICIAL Requesting a defence from the NCA under POCA and TACT This document is intended to inform you of the approach when reporters, through submitting a suspicious activity report (SAR), seek a defence (or ‘consent’) from the National Crime Agency (NCA): to a principal money laundering offence (sections 327-329 Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 [‘POCA’]) under sections 335 and 336 of POCA; and/or a terrorist financing offence (sections 15-18 Terrorism Act 2000 [‘TACT’]) under section 21ZA of TACT. Please ensure you are familiar with: Part 7 of POCA Part 3 of TACT 1 If you are a business in the regulated sector , any guidance issued by your anti-money laundering supervisor, professional body or trade association. If you are unsure, always seek your own independent legal advice and/or consult your supervisor or trade body. If there is a threat of harm or crime in action please ring the police on 999. The UKFIU can be contacted by email: [email protected] 1 If you are unsure if your firm is in the regulated sector consult your regulator, professional body or trade association, or seek independent legal advice 2 OFFICIAL OFFICIAL A note on the term ‘consent’ The term ‘consent’ is frequently misinterpreted. Often it is seen as seeking permission or that where requests are granted that this is a statement that the funds are clean or that there is no criminality involved. This is not the case.
    [Show full text]
  • National Crime Agency a Plan for the Creation of a National Crime-Fighting Capability
    THE NATIONAL CRIME AGENCY A PLAN FOR THE CREATION OF A NATIONAL CRIME-FIGHTING CAPABILITY The National Crime Agency A plan for the creation of a national crime-fighting capability Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for the Home Department by Command of Her Majesty June 2011 Cm 8097 £8.50 © Crown copyright 2011 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/ open-government-licence/ or e-mail: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: National Crime Agency Programme Home Office 6th Floor Peel Building 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Email: [email protected] This publication is also available for download at www.official-documents.gov.uk ISBN: 9780101809726 Printed in the UK by The Stationery Office Limited on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ID P002435167 06/11 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. Contents FOREWORD 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 1 INTRODUCTION 7 2 THE NEED FOR THE NCA 9 • Cutting crime • National threats • Existing response 3 THE VISION FOR THE NCA 12 4 THE SCOPE AND FUNCTIONALITY OF THE NCA 13 • Scope • Resources • Core capabilities - Intelligence, prioritisation and tasking - Investigation
    [Show full text]
  • Mass Surveillance
    Mass Surveillance Mass Surveillance What are the risks for the citizens and the opportunities for the European Information Society? What are the possible mitigation strategies? Part 1 - Risks and opportunities raised by the current generation of network services and applications Study IP/G/STOA/FWC-2013-1/LOT 9/C5/SC1 January 2015 PE 527.409 STOA - Science and Technology Options Assessment The STOA project “Mass Surveillance Part 1 – Risks, Opportunities and Mitigation Strategies” was carried out by TECNALIA Research and Investigation in Spain. AUTHORS Arkaitz Gamino Garcia Concepción Cortes Velasco Eider Iturbe Zamalloa Erkuden Rios Velasco Iñaki Eguía Elejabarrieta Javier Herrera Lotero Jason Mansell (Linguistic Review) José Javier Larrañeta Ibañez Stefan Schuster (Editor) The authors acknowledge and would like to thank the following experts for their contributions to this report: Prof. Nigel Smart, University of Bristol; Matteo E. Bonfanti PhD, Research Fellow in International Law and Security, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna Pisa; Prof. Fred Piper, University of London; Caspar Bowden, independent privacy researcher; Maria Pilar Torres Bruna, Head of Cybersecurity, Everis Aerospace, Defense and Security; Prof. Kenny Paterson, University of London; Agustín Martin and Luis Hernández Encinas, Tenured Scientists, Department of Information Processing and Cryptography (Cryptology and Information Security Group), CSIC; Alessandro Zanasi, Zanasi & Partners; Fernando Acero, Expert on Open Source Software; Luigi Coppolino,Università degli Studi di Napoli; Marcello Antonucci, EZNESS srl; Rachel Oldroyd, Managing Editor of The Bureau of Investigative Journalism; Peter Kruse, Founder of CSIS Security Group A/S; Ryan Gallagher, investigative Reporter of The Intercept; Capitán Alberto Redondo, Guardia Civil; Prof. Bart Preneel, KU Leuven; Raoul Chiesa, Security Brokers SCpA, CyberDefcon Ltd.; Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • We Only Spy on Foreigners": the Myth of a Universal Right to Privacy and the Practice of Foreign Mass Surveillance
    Chicago Journal of International Law Volume 18 Number 2 Article 3 1-1-2018 "We Only Spy on Foreigners": The Myth of a Universal Right to Privacy and the Practice of Foreign Mass Surveillance Asaf Lubin Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cjil Recommended Citation Lubin, Asaf (2018) ""We Only Spy on Foreigners": The Myth of a Universal Right to Privacy and the Practice of Foreign Mass Surveillance," Chicago Journal of International Law: Vol. 18: No. 2, Article 3. Available at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cjil/vol18/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. “We Only Spy on Foreigners”: The Myth of a Universal Right to Privacy and the Practice of Foreign Mass Surveillance Asaf Lubin Abstract The digital age brought with it a new epoch in global political life, one neatly coined by Professor Philip Howard as the “pax technica.” In this new world order, government and industry are “tightly bound” in technological and security arrangements that serve to push forward an information and cyber revolution of unparalleled magnitude. While the rise of information technologies tells a miraculous story of triumph over the physical constraints that once shackled mankind, these very technologies are also the cause of grave concern. Intelligence agencies have been recently involved in the exercise of global indiscriminate surveillance, which purports to go beyond their limited territorial jurisdiction and sweep in “the telephone, internet, and location records of whole populations.” Today’s political leaders and corporate elites are increasingly engaged in these kinds of programs of bulk interception, collection, mining, analysis, dissemination, and exploitation of foreign communications data that are easily susceptible to gross abuse and impropriety.
    [Show full text]
  • Surveillance by Intelligence Services: Services: Intelligence by Surveillance
    FREEDOMS FRA Surveillance by intelligence services – Volume II: field perspectives and legal update II: field perspectives – Volume services intelligence by Surveillance Surveillance by intelligence services: fundamental rights safeguards and remedies in the EU Volume II: field perspectives and legal update This report addresses matters related to the respect for private and family life (Article 7), the protection of personal data (Article 8) and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial (Article 47) falling under Titles II ‘Freedoms’ and VI ‘Justice’ of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). Photo (cover & inside): © Shutterstock More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017 FRA – print: ISBN 978-92-9491-766-9 doi:10.2811/15232 TK-04-17-696-EN-C FRA – web: ISBN 978-92-9491-765-2 doi:10.2811/792946 TK-04-17-696-EN-N © European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2017 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not under the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights copyright, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holders. Printed by Imprimerie Centrale in Luxembourg Neither the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights nor any person acting on behalf of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights is responsible for the use that might be made of the following information.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyber Crime Assessment 2016
    NCA Strategic Cyber Industry Group Cyber Crime Assessment 2016 Need for a stronger law enforcement and business partnership to fight cyber crime 7 July 2016 Version 1.2 Overview This assessment has been jointly produced by the National Crime Agency (NCA) and the Strategic Cyber Industry Group (SCIG).1 It outlines the real and immediate threat to UK businesses from cyber crime. It argues that the speed of criminal capability development is currently outpacing our response as a community and that only by working together across law enforcement and the private sector can we successfully reduce the threat to the UK from cyber crime. 1 The Strategic Cyber Industry Group provides an overarching forum within which the National Cyber Crime Unit (NCCU) of the NCA and private sector organisations work in partnership to: coordinate joint activity against cyber crime, identify intelligence gaps and improve intelligence sharing, understand the capabilities available in law enforcement and industry, and steer the activities of Virtual Task Forces and ad hoc working groups. We would like to thank Bill Trent of Stroz Friedberg who led the SCIG contributions to this assessment. 2 Executive Summary A cyber attack that poses an existential threat to one or more major UK businesses is a realistic possibility. The long-term impact of such a cyber attack could include substantial loss of revenue and margin, of valuable data, and of other company assets. The impact of litigation costs (and, with the arrival of new regulations, potential fines), the loss of confidence from reputational damage and possible executive-level dismissals could also result in immediate and material loss of shareholder value.
    [Show full text]
  • Right to Privacy and State Policy on Cyber Security
    Przegląd Strategiczny 2020, Issue 13 Robert MACIEJEWSKI DOI : 10.14746/ps.2020.1.23 University of Applied Sciences in Wałcz https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1153-8688 RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND STATE POLICY ON CYBER SECURITY. NECESSITY OR THREAT FROM THE STATE The state, as a politically organised community, has a duty to ensure that its citi- zens, on the one hand, have the right to privacy (right to be alone), which is one of the fundamental rights of every human being, and, on the other hand, it has a duty to guar- antee the safety of its citizens, including safety in cyberspace. It therefore seems es- sential that the state strikes a balance between citizens’ rights to privacy and their duty to act for their security, including cyber security. However, the emerging omnipotence of the state in cyber security is becoming an increasing threat to citizens and their right to privacy. Under the guise of ensuring the security of its citizens, the state interferes in almost every aspect of life, and repeatedly does so in a way that can hardly be con- sidered compatible with the standards of a democratic rule of law. Particular attention should be paid to the activities of state bodies in cyberspace. The use by state services of programs for so-called mass surveillance, without the control of judicial authorities, causes that from a democratic state it starts to transform into a total state from where it is not far from a totalitarian one. The main research objective of this article is to attempt to answer the question whether and what kind of threat to the fundamental rights of citizens, in particular the right to privacy and consequently to the democratic rule of law, posed by the State’s actions to ensure security in cyberspace.
    [Show full text]