April 20, 2024
The Section 702 economic risks that few are talking about
Corporations and investors are rightfully examining their geopolitical risk exposure in light of the Iranian strike against Israel and the Israeli response.
However, there’s an underappreciated political risk far closer to home that could significantly impact the U.S. and United Kingdom business communities and which geopolitical analysts should add to their risk portfolio – the potential lapse of U.S. Section 702 authority. The Senate moved to extend the authority on Thursday after a rocky path in the House of Representatives, but challenging politics around Section 702 could constitute an ongoing threat to American and British investors and corporations alike, even if the Senate passes the extension in short order.
The U.S. business community and its British partners should be fully invested in Section 702’s reauthorization, and, equally important, pay attention to evolving politics on Section 702 if there is a change of administration.
The authority is uniquely suited to address threats that either did not exist or have metastasized since FISA’s last reauthorization in 2018. For example, U.S. energy companies have faced a wave of cyber threats over the last five years. The May 2021 ransomware attack on the Colonial Pipeline, which resulted in significant delays in gasoline deliveries to Americans, epitomized increasing cyberattacks against U.S. critical infrastructure. Section 702 has become the primary tool to detect and thwart these attacks.
This cyber threat will likely increase in light of Iran’s strike, and both the U.S. and the U.K. could be targets given their defense of Israel against Iranian missiles. Iran will not strike them directly; instead, it will likely rely on shadow cyber attacks, along with proxy forces, such as the Houthis, to harass U.S. and U.K. interests.
American and British companies should expect enhanced cyber attacks out of Tehran, similar to what Iran launched in 2022 against Britain and what it constantly unleashes on the U.S. These threats will become harder to stop were Section 702 to disappear.
Read the full article from The Hill.
More from CNAS
-
Podcast
Transatlantic Security / Energy, Economics & Security
From Russia with RiskHere on the Bear Market Brief, a lot of what we focus on is, simply put, risk: what might happen, and what might it mean? On this episode, Rachel Ziemba, an adjunct senior fel...
By Rachel Ziemba
-
Richard Nephew on the U.S. military strikes on Iran’s nuclear program
Podcast
Richard Nephew, expert on sanctions and Iran’s nuclear program, joins Emily and Geoff to discuss the long history of U.S. policy towards Iran, the role of sanctions in constra...
By Emily Kilcrease & Geoffrey Gertz
-
Commentary
Energy, Economics & Security / Technology & National Security
Beyond Bans: Expanding the Policy Options for Tech-Security ThreatsStuck between a rock (the fact that banning all Chinese tech that poses a risk is expensive and impractical) and a hard place (the fact that many existing mitigation proposals...
By Geoffrey Gertz
-
Video
Indo-Pacific Security / Energy, Economics & Security
75 Years Post-Korean War: Can Trust Be Rebuilt Under the New Administration?As President Lee Jae Myung begins his term, he's taking visible steps to reset the tone with North Korea: halting propaganda broadcasts and reemphasizing past military agreeme...
By Dr. Go Myong-Hyun
