IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcybxx/v2y2017i1p82-95.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cybersecurity, trustworthiness and resilient systems: guiding values for policy

Author

Listed:
  • Adam Henschke
  • Shannon Brandt Ford

Abstract

Cyberspace relies on information technologies to mediate relations between different people, across different communication networks and is reliant on the supporting technology. These interactions typically occur without physical proximity and those working depending on cybersystems must be able to trust the overall human–technical systems that support cyberspace. As such, detailed discussion of cybersecurity policy would be improved by including trust as a key value to help guide policy discussions. Moreover, effective cybersystems must have resilience designed into them. This paper argues that trustworthy cybersystems are a key element to resilient systems, and thus are core to cybersecurity policy. The paper highlights the importance of trustworthiness for resilient cybersystems. The importance of trustworthiness is shown through a discussion of three events where trustworthiness was the target or casualty of cyberattacks: Stuxnet, hacking of communications and the Edward Snowden revelations. The impact of losing trust is highlighted, to underpin the argument that a resilient cybersystem ought to design in trustworthiness. The paper closes off by presenting a general set of policy implications arising from recognition of the interplay between trust, trustworthiness and resilience for effective cybersecurity.

Suggested Citation

  • Adam Henschke & Shannon Brandt Ford, 2017. "Cybersecurity, trustworthiness and resilient systems: guiding values for policy," Journal of Cyber Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 82-95, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcybxx:v:2:y:2017:i:1:p:82-95
    DOI: 10.1080/23738871.2016.1243721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/23738871.2016.1243721
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/23738871.2016.1243721?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rcybxx:v:2:y:2017:i:1:p:82-95. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rcyb .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.