Multinational perspectives on information technology from academia and industry

As the term \u27information technology\u27 has many meanings for various stakeholders and continues to evolve, this work presents a comprehensive approach for developing curriculum guidelines for rigorous, high quality, bachelor\u27s degree programs in information technology (IT) to prepare successful graduates for a future global technological society. The aim is to address three research questions in the context of IT concerning (1) the educational frameworks relevant for academics and students of IT, (2) the pathways into IT programs, and (3) graduates\u27 preparation for meeting future technologies. The analysis of current trends comes from survey data of IT faculty members and professional IT industry leaders. With these analyses, the IT Model Curricula of CC2005, IT2008, IT2017, extensive literature review, and the multinational insights of the authors into the status of IT, this paper presents a comprehensive overview and discussion of future directions of global IT education toward 2025

Enter the cyber dragon: understanding Chinese intelligence agencies cyber capabilities

This paper argues that the nature and tempo of Chinese cyber‑activities have policy implications for the Australian government. The paper provides an understanding of the key elements of the Chinese intelligence agencies that exploit the cyberdomain. It also shows that, while cybersecurity is a concern, much media coverage tends to oversimplify the issue and not present the public with the fuller picture. 2013 is the year that cyber issues have taken on a heightened priority and strategic weight. Governments must now work out how to handle cyber matters as an element of their foreign policy to prevent long-term damage to international relationships

Warfighting for cyber deterrence: a strategic and moral imperative

Theories of cyber deterrence are developing rapidly. However, the literature is missing an important ingredient—warfighting for deterrence. This controversial idea, most commonly associated with nuclear strategy during the later stages of the Cold War, affords a number of advantages. It provides enhanced credibility for deterrence, offers means to deal with deterrence failure (including intrawar deterrence and damage limitation), improves compliance with the requirements of just war and ultimately ensures that strategy continues to function in the post-deterrence environment. This paper assesses whether a warfighting for deterrence approach is suitable for the cyber domain. In doing so, it challenges the notion that warfighting concepts are unsuitable for operations in cyberspace. To do this, the work constructs a conceptual framework that is then applied to cyber deterrence. It is found that all of the advantages of taking a warfighting stance apply to cyber operations. The paper concludes by constructing a warfighting model for cyber deterrence. This model includes passive and active defences and cross-domain offensive capabilities. The central message of the paper is that a theory of victory (strategy) must guide the development of cyber deterrence

Agenda for change: strategic choices for the next government

The next government has a primary requirement to be well briefed on the challenges inherent in Australia’s strategic circumstances and the policy options available to it. ASPI is publishing this report to layout our strategic choices and to provide recommendations. Contributors are Peter Jennings on strategic policy, Mark Thomson and Andrew Davies on defence, Anthony Bergin and Kristy Bryden on homeland security, Russell Trood on foreign policy and Ryan Stokes on economic security. This body of ideas makes a compelling contribution to the discussions which ought always to characterise the Australian strategic and defence debate

The European Union versus External Disinformation Campaigns in the Midst of Information Warfare: Ready for the Battle? College of Europe EU Diplomacy Paper 01/2019

As a result of increased globalisation and digitalisation, new security challenges emerge such as the rise of online disinformation which undermines democracy and people’s trust in mainstream media and public authorities. The 2016 United States presidential elections, the Brexit referendum in the United Kingdom and the 2017 French presidential elections have all been disturbed by external interference coming from Russia, including massive disinformation campaigns which were disseminated on social media to influence citizens’ opinion. This paper studies the European Union’s (EU) strategy to counter external disinformation campaigns in cyberspace, i.e. the campaigns that are diffused online by foreign actors, such as Russia, within the EU’s territory. To what extent is the EU strategically prepared to counter external disinformation campaigns in cyberspace? The EU has adopted a defensive strategy to deal with disinformation. It has delivered several strategic documents, including an Action Plan in December 2018, that provides a promising basis for action. The work done by the East StratCom Task Force, which detects and debunks Russian narratives, is a strong asset for the EU. The major online platforms are currently trying to implement a Code of Practice that the European Commission has set up with the aim of curbing disinformation spreading on social networks. Having a long-term perspective in mind, the EU rightly implements measures to enhance societal resilience and improve media literacy among its citizens. However, the financial resources dedicated to counter disinformation are not commensurate with the threat it represents. Furthermore, the EU’s approach is not focusing enough on artificial intelligence tools that can significantly influence how disinformation is carried out and disseminated but can, on the other hand, also help fact-checking activities. Hence, the EU is not entirely prepared to counter external disinformation campaigns in cyberspace. Moreover, disinformation should be looked at in the wider framework of hybrid warfare and should therefore be considered as a cybersecurity matter

Smart Factories, Dumb Policy? Managing Cybersecurity and Data Privacy Risks in the Industrial Internet of Things

Interest is booming in the so-called Internet of Things (IoT). The Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) is one application of this trend and involves the use of smart technologies in a manufac- turing context. Even though these applications hold the promise to revolutionize manufacturing, there are a number of outstand- ing cybersecurity and data privacy issues impacting the realiza- tion of the myriad benefits promised by IIoT proponents. This ar- ticle analyzes some of these pressing issues, focusing on: (1) critical infrastructure protection and cybersecurity due diligence, (2) trends in transatlantic data privacy protections, and (3) the regulation of new technologies like artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain. The aticle concludes with a list of recommendations for state and federal policymakers to consider in an effort to harden the IIoT along with the supply chains critical to the con- tinued development of smart factories

Artificial Intelligence, International Competition, and the Balance of Power (May 2018)

World leaders, CEOs, and academics have suggested that a revolution in artificial intelligence is upon us. Are they right, and what will advances in artificial intelligence mean for international competition and the balance of power? This article evaluates how developments in artificial intelligence (AI) — advanced, narrow applications in particular — are poised to influence military power and international politics. It describes how AI more closely resembles “enabling” technologies such as the combustion engine or electricity than a specific weapon. AI’s still-emerging developments make it harder to assess than many technological changes, especially since many of the organizational decisions about the adoption and uses of new technology that generally shape the impact of that technology are in their infancy. The article then explores the possibility that key drivers of AI development in the private sector could cause the rapid diffusion of military applications of AI, limiting first-mover advantages for innovators. Alternatively, given uncertainty about the technological trajectory of AI, it is also possible that military uses of AI will be harder to develop based on private-sector AI technologies than many expect, generating more potential first-mover advantages for existing powers such as China and the United States, as well as larger consequences for relative power if a country fails to adapt. Finally, the article discusses the extent to which U.S. military rhetoric about the importance of AI matches the reality of U.S. investments.LBJ School of Public Affair