Moving from a ‘human-as-problem” to a ‘human-as-solution” cybersecurity mindset

an article by Verena Zimmermann (TU Darmstadt, Germany) and Karen Renaud (Abertay University, Dundee, UK; University of South Africa, Pretoria) published in International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Volume 131 (November 2019)

Highlights

• In the cybersecurity area humans are considered to be a problem to be controlled by both government and industry.
• Consequently, efforts are made to exclude, train, control and constrain them, reducing them to rule followers.
• We suggest that this robs organisations of their human agents’ ability to make a contribution to cyber security and their potential role as solution.
• Benefitting from similar paradigm shifts in other fields, we propose a new mindset titled ‘‘Cybersecurity, Differently”.
• We propose a set of principles for achieving this shift, and demonstrate how these could be applied.

Abstract

Cybersecurity has gained prominence, with a number of widely publicised security incidents, hacking attacks and data breaches reaching the news over the last few years. The escalation in the numbers of cyber incidents shows no sign of abating, and it seems appropriate to take a look at the way cybersecurity is conceptualised and to consider whether there is a need for a mindset change.

To consider this question, we applied a “problematisation” approach to assess current conceptualisations of the cybersecurity problem by government, industry and hackers. Our analysis revealed that individual human actors, in a variety of roles, are generally considered to be “a problem”. We also discovered that deployed solutions primarily focus on preventing adverse events by building resistance: i.e. implementing new security layers and policies that control humans and constrain their problematic behaviours. In essence, this treats all humans in the system as if they might well be malicious actors, and the solutions are designed to prevent their ill-advised behaviours.

Given the continuing incidences of data breaches and successful hacks, it seems wise to rethink the status quo approach, which we refer to as “Cybersecurity, Currently”. In particular, we suggest that there is a need to reconsider the core assumptions and characterisations of the well-intentioned human’s role in the cybersecurity socio-technical system. Treating everyone as a problem does not seem to work, given the current cyber security landscape.

Benefiting from research in other fields, we propose a new mindset i.e. “Cybersecurity, Differently”. This approach rests on recognition of the fact that the problem is actually the high complexity, interconnectedness and emergent qualities of socio-technical systems. The “differently” mindset acknowledges the well-intentioned human’s ability to be an important contributor to organisational cybersecurity, as well as their potential to be “part of the solution” rather than “the problem”. In essence, this new approach initially treats all humans in the system as if they are well-intentioned. The focus is on enhancing factors that contribute to positive outcomes and resilience. We conclude by proposing a set of key principles and, with the help of a prototypical fictional organisation, consider how this mindset could enhance and improve cybersecurity across the socio-technical system.

Graphical abstract

Full text (PDF 19pp)

---

The ghost in the legal machine: algorithmic governmentality, economy, and the practice of law

an article by Adam Harkens (Queen’s University Belfast, UK) published in Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society Volume 16 Issue 1 (2018)

Abstract

Purpose
This paper aims to investigate algorithmic governmentality – as proposed by Antoinette Rouvroy – specifically in relation to law. It seeks to show how algorithmic profiling can be particularly attractive for those in legal practice, given restraints on time and resources. It deviates from Rouvroy in two ways. First, it argues that algorithmic governmentality does not contrast with neoliberal modes of government in that it allows indirect rule through economic calculations. Second, it argues that critique of such systems is possible, especially if the creative nature of law can be harnessed effectively.

Design/methodology/approach
This is a conceptual paper, with a theory-based approach, that is intended to explore relevant issues related to algorithmic governmentality as a basis for future empirical research. It builds on governmentality and socio-legal studies, as well as research on algorithmic practices and some documentary analysis of reports and public-facing marketing of relevant technologies.

Findings
This paper provides insights on how algorithmic knowledge is collected, constructed and applied in different situations. It provides examples of how algorithms are currently used and how trends are developing. It demonstrates how such uses can be informed by socio-political and economic rationalities.

Research limitations/implications
Further empirical research is required to test the theoretical findings.

Originality/value
This paper takes up Rouvroy’s question of whether we are at the end(s) of critique and seeks to identify where such critique can be made possible. It also highlights the importance of acknowledging the role of political rationalities in informing the activity of algorithmic assemblages.

---

What Words Can’t Say: Emoji and other non-verbal elements of technologically-mediated communication

an article by Alexis M. Elder (University of Minnesota Duluth, Minnesota, USA) published in Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society Volume 16 Issue 1 (2018)

Abstract

Purpose
This paper aims to survey the moral psychology of emoji, time-restricted messaging and other non-verbal elements of nominally textual computer-mediated communication (CMC). These features are increasingly common in interpersonal communication. Effects on both individual well-being and quality of intimate relationships are assessed. Results of this assessment are used to support ethical conclusions about these elements of digital communication.

Design/methodology/approach
Assessment of these non-verbal elements of CMC is framed in light of relevant literature from a variety of fields, including neuroscience, behavioral economics and social psychology. The resulting ethical analysis is informed by both Aristotelian and Buddhist virtue ethics.

Findings
This paper finds that emoji and other nonverbal elements of CMC have positive potential for individual well-being and interpersonal communication. They can be used to focus and direct attention, express and acknowledge difficult emotions and increase altruistic tendencies.

Research limitations/implications
This paper is conceptual, extrapolating from existing literature to investigate possibilities rather than reporting on novel experiments. It is not intended to substitute for empirical research on use patterns and their effects. But by identifying positive potential, it can help both users and designers to support individual and relational well-being.

Practical implications
The positive effects identified here can be incorporated into both design and use strategies for CMC.

Social implications
Situating ethical analysis of these trending technologies within literature from the social sciences on the effects of stylized faces, disappearing messages and directed attention can help us both understand their appeal to users and best practices for using them to enrich our social lives.

Originality/value
The paper uses empirically informed moral psychology to understand a deceptively trivial-looking phenomenon with wide-ranging impacts on human psychology and relationships.

Acknowledgments
This paper has been adapted from a chapter from a forthcoming book Friendship, Robots, and Social Media: False Friends and Second Selves by Alexis Elder (Routledge, 2018).

I simply had to look up moral psychology. Wikipedia, which I find is usually accurate about scientific subjects, tells me that moral psychology is a field of study in both philosophy and psychology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_psychology

---