Srl | Item |
1 |
ID:
105485
|
|
|
2 |
ID:
090618
|
|
|
3 |
ID:
113324
|
|
|
Publication |
2012.
|
Summary/Abstract |
The international scope of the Internet and wide reach of technological usage requires cyber defence systems to intersect largely with the application and implementation of international legislation. One of the problems associated with the technological revolution is that cyber space comprises complex and dynamic technological innovations to which no current legal system is well suited. A further complication is the lack of comprehensive treaties facilitating international cooperation with regard to cyber defence. The result is that many countries will not be properly prepared or adequately protected by legislation in the event of a cyber attack on a national level.
The article investigates this problem by touching on the influence that cyber defence has on the international position of the government. The article addresses the principles of cyber security and cyber warfare acts, and briefly touches on cyber security collaboration efforts for South Africa. The authors are of the opinion that Africa does not follow a coordinated approach in dealing with cyber security, and that the various structures that have been established to deal with cyber security are inadequate to deal with issues holistically. To work towards such a co ordinated approach, it is suggested that specific interventions be developed to address cyber crime. This approach should create and maintain a partnership or collaboration between business, government and civil society. The authors are of the opinion that unless these spheres of society work together, Africa's efforts to ensure a secure cyber space may be compromised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
ID:
116324
|
|
|
Publication |
2012.
|
Summary/Abstract |
The management of information and knowledge in the defence sector stands at an interesting juncture. Key dilemmas facing the defence sector are on one hand, identifying and effectively using the increasing potential of technical interoperability; on the other hand, the need for new management practices juxtaposed with the escalating global challenge to security to counteract the rise of cyber crime, cyber espionage and in the extreme, cyber warfare. As a consequence, governments are increasingly identifying their digital infrastructure as a strategic national asset that also needs to be better protected. This paper argues that such threats to the defence sector from cyberspace challenge existing paradigms for managing information and knowledge and suggests a more radical approach to gaining knowledge superiority is prescient to remain agile in the fast-moving, technologically advanced defence cyberspace. This paper posits the view that if the defence sector acknowledges information and knowledge as a strategic asset it needs to be more aware of the advantages of knowledge management (KM) and place it at the centre of the strategic management approach. This research also highlights the importance of the production and application of knowledge to manage the developing potential threats to the battle space, the business space and now cyberspace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
ID:
113383
|
|
|
6 |
ID:
105609
|
|
|
7 |
ID:
093872
|
|
|
Publication |
2010.
|
Summary/Abstract |
The last couple of decades have seen a colossal change in terms of the influence that computers can have on the battlefield, with defence pundits claiming it to be the dawn of a new era in warfare. Under these circumstances, there has been a gradual paradigm shift in military thinking and strategies from the strategic aspect to the tactical aspect of cyber warfare, laying more emphasis on it being a potent force multiplier. The author believes this is wrong and rather than cyber warfare being an enhancement of traditional operations, the latter will be force multipliers of cyber warfare. This article tries to shatter myths woven around cyber warfare so as to illuminate the strategic aspects of this relatively misinterpreted notion, thus identifying a paradigm shift, making cyber war the primary means of achieving grand strategic objectives in the contemporary world order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
ID:
108288
|
|
|
9 |
ID:
130920
|
|
|
Publication |
2014.
|
Summary/Abstract |
This paper asks whether the recent "reset" in Russia-US relations parallels the Cold War reprieve from East to West tensions during Détente. The author considers the enthusiasm for this reset shared by Presidents Medvedev and Obama and acknowledges the benefits accrued for Russia as a result of better relations with the United States. In so doing, the paper argues that the Medvedev-Obama reset is not the result of a convergence of liberal-minded principles shared by the leadership, due in large part to the absence of a meaningful commitment on the part of Medvedev to bring about meaningful liberal reforms in Russia. In fact, the reset seems more the result of a desire by both leaders to shed past ideological disagreements in favor of a more pragmatic approach to relations, based upon mutual benefit. The paper then concludes that the current reset is not a temporary warming of relations akin to a second-generation détente because there was no "new Cold War" to abate. The paper contributes to the growing body of opinion that acknowledges a need for analysts and practitioners to search for a better lens through which to view Russia-US relations than the Cold War prism that persistently frames our analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
ID:
170890
|
|
|
11 |
ID:
162273
|
|
|
Publication |
New Delhi, Pentagon Press, 2019.
|
Description |
xv, 175p.hbk
|
Standard Number |
9789386618665
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:2/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
059544 | 005.8/SAM 059544 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
059545 | 005.8/SAM 059545 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
12 |
ID:
138703
|
|
|
Summary/Abstract |
The 2008 war between Georgia and Russia was predictably short, as Russian military might quickly trumped Georgian nationalist enthusiasm. Beyond its momentous geopolitical implications, it was the first war in which cyber activities loomed large; the conflict marked the public birth of “cyber war,” or at least cyber in war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
ID:
133608
|
|
|
Publication |
2014.
|
Summary/Abstract |
The issue of cybersecurity as an issue for international security has captured the attention of policy makers around the world. A 2011 United Nations (UN) assessment found that only 68 of the 193 UN member states had cybersecurity programmes. By 2012, this had increased to 114 countries. Of the nations with cybersecurity programmes, roughly 40 have publicly identified cybersecurity as a military concern in national military strategies or defence white papers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
ID:
102986
|
|
|
15 |
ID:
142257
|
|
|
Summary/Abstract |
NATO’s adaptation in the post-cold war era has included a growing role in responding to cyber attacks. This article explores the definitional and theoretical problems in analysing the emerging cyber security field and seeks to provide an outline of the main strategic challenges that cyber attacks pose for NATO. The article evaluates the institutional structures and processes put in place by NATO to confront cyber threats and moves on to explore the extent of transatlantic unity around NATO’s emerging doctrine for cyber defence. It is argued that NATO’s response to cyber security is rooted in its prior adaptation to the changing security environment of the 1990s and the threat from international terrorism post 9-11. More recently, cyber attacks from state and state-sponsored actors have given impetus to NATO’s emerging cyber security doctrine. The article finds that despite recent controversies over cyber surveillance, there is a considerable degree of unity within the alliance on the main cyber security issues. As a multilateral security organisation with a strong institutional foundation, NATO is also relatively well placed to respond to rapidly evolving cyber threats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
ID:
132844
|
|
|
Publication |
2014.
|
Summary/Abstract |
The US defence department continues to increase its investment in cyber defence. At the same time, the Pentagon is enhancing its technology foundation in this mission and bolstering its cooperation with allies and partner nations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
ID:
149390
|
|
|
18 |
ID:
170531
|
|
|
Summary/Abstract |
This paper looks at Japan’s cybersecurity policies while placing the focus on the defense of critical
infrastructure that is directly related to national security, and examines the measures that need to be
put in place going forward in regard to public-private partnership initiatives. Firstly, it takes a broad
overview of Japan’s policies followed by an overview of the cybersecurity policies of the Republic
of Estonia, and carries out a comparison with Japan based on the following six classifications:
cybersecurity strategy, legal systems, public-private partnership organizations and informationsharing systems, risk analysis and business continuity plans, cyber exercises, and national defense
strategy and organizations. Then, the feasibility of implementation in Japan is considered. Finally, it
makes the following recommendations: (1) Positioning the protection of critical infrastructure as the
most important issue in the cybersecurity strategy; (2) Reviewing the legal system and strengthening
the supervision and guidance of critical information infrastructure (CII) operators; (3) Strengthening
the authority of the National center of Incident readiness and Strategy for Cybersecurity (NISC), and
enhancing its functions; (4) Implementing exercises in preparation for a large-scale cyberattack at the
national level; (5) Building a framework that enables civilians with advanced skills to participate in
national defense in cyberspace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|