February 21, 2022
The Cyber Social Contract
In the spring of 2021, a Russia-based cybercrime group launched a ransomware attack against the largest fuel pipeline in the United States. According to the cybersecurity firm Mandiant, the subsequent shutdown and gas shortage across the East Coast likely originated from a single compromised password. That an individual misstep might disrupt critical services for millions illustrates just how vulnerable the United States’ digital ecosystem is in the twenty-first century.
Although most participants in the cyber-ecosystem are aware of these growing risks, the responsibility for mitigating systemic hazards is poorly distributed. Cyber-professionals and policymakers are too often motivated more by a fear of risk than by an aspiration to realize cyberspace’s full potential. Exacerbating this dynamic is a decades-old tendency among the large and sophisticated actors who design, construct, and operate digital systems to devolve the cost and difficulty of risk mitigation onto users who often lack the resources and expertise to address them.
Cyberthreats represent a betrayal of what advocates promised at the dawn of the digital revolution.
Too often, this state of affairs produces digital ecosystems where private information is easily accessible, predatory technology is inexpensive, and momentary lapses in vigilance can snowball into a continent-wide catastrophe. Although individually oriented tools like multifactor authentication and password managers are critical to solving elements of this problem, they are inadequate on their own. A durable solution must involve moving away from the tendency to charge isolated individuals, small businesses, and local governments with shouldering absurd levels of risk. Those more capable of carrying the load—such as governments and large firms—must take on some of the burden, and collective, collaborative defense needs to replace atomized and divided efforts. Until then, the problem will always look like someone else’s to solve.
Read the full article from Foreign Affairs.
More from CNAS
-
Technology & National Security
American AI Companies Can’t Get Enough ChipsExecutive Summary In 2026, artificial intelligence (AI) chip production has become a binding constraint on the pace of the AI compute buildout. Demand for computing power to t...
By James Sanders, Janet Egan & Rory Madigan
-
Technology & National Security
Anthony Vinci on Turning Uncertainty Into Decisions With AI ForecastingAnthony Vinci, CEO of Vico, joins the podcast to explain how AI-powered forecasting can quantify uncertainty and help people make better decisions. Drawing from his background...
By Anthony Vinci
-
Indo-Pacific Security / Technology & National Security
CNAS Insights | Trump Should Talk to Xi About Military AIWhen President Donald Trump goes to China to meet with General Secretary Xi Jinping next month, the leaders of the world’s two superpowers will have much to discuss, with trad...
By Jacob Stokes & Daniel Remler
-
Technology & National Security
The Political Limits of China’s AI Diffusion AmbitionsBeijing’s drive to diffuse AI will increasingly run up against its commitment to employment stability and fear of collective action....
By Ruby Scanlon