My missed summer read:
DO CRIMINALS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP?
How technology shapes the future of crime and law enforcement Europol
Written by our inhouse resident editor, Lyndsay Turley, an experienced communicator and cybersecurity advocate for over 15 years.
It’s September 2nd, for many the first day back after a good summer break. This is a day that I like to look back over the summer months and see what I may have missed. Thank you to social media for the helpful highlights.
Europol’s review of disruptive technology caught my eye this year, and even though it was published back in July, it provides a perspective that makes it a relevant read today, and I imagine I am not the only one to have missed it!
Getting beyond the catchy title and the fact that we already know about the technologies discussed, it’s important for cyber security leaders to understand how technology development is being assessed from the point of view of law enforcement.
They acknowledge a need to work with the private sector more than ever before and lay out the inherent conflicts between this effort and the current trajectory of development of these new technologies. Their aim is to inject their perspective into the development itself, through the goodwill of private sector cooperation, standards and regulation. It seems to me that the long-standing argument we have today over encryption standards and the provision of access to ‘back doors’ could have done with the level of advance dialogue they are now advocating for the current wave of innovation, coming from 5G, AI/ML; distributed networks; cryptocurrencies and more.
Concerns over the structure of 5G networks to make obsolete currently “legally permissible, technical investigation and surveillance measures. One of the most important tactical operational and investigation tools …” for example, has prompted a call for “keeping track of 5G developments and ensuring that lawful interception by design becomes (and stays) part of that evolution.”
They also suggest that law enforcement authorities should “ensure
their involvement in discussions around the regulation and use of quantum-enabled computing completing the private sector view, which is not necessarily informed by security and public safety considerations.”