The electoral college victory of Donald Trump has been devastating for too many reasons to count, from the impact on the middle class, the poor, minorities, and even Texas. This man is a threat to our nation’s well-being economically, politically, and socially. Those saying everything will be alright need to wake up the dire threat he and his team of deplorables are to ethnic minorities, people of color, women, the LGBTQ community, and other diverse groups. But we also must investigate the foreign policy impact of President Trump.
The team that Trump will appoint will be full of the scrubs and discards of the Bush Administration, in fact it is often made of those too extreme to even serve in polite society. Instead of draining the swamp we are restocking it and throwing a few non-native invasive species in for good measure. From John “lose ten floors of the UN” Bolton, to Sarah “you can see Russia from Alaska” Palin, to his team of Russia sycophants who will likely trade Ukraine and the Baltics for Russian support on our war against the Islamic State, nothing good can come from this election from the foreign policy perspective and this has a direct impact on the work we do as IR scholars. We must deal with this issue in our research.
Cross posting with the Niskanen Center
Brandon Valeriano and Allison Pytlak
This week the Group of Governmental Experts (GGE), as part of the United Nations, is meeting once again in what has become a regular reflection of current thought in the field of cyber security internationally. ‘Reflection’ is the perfect word to describe what the GGE does because it’s not clear to what purpose the group is moving. It might be a useful exercise to review what we know about cyber security at this point and why the GGE will fail to engage with the most pressing problems generated in and from cyberspace.
Jamie Collier and Brandon Valeriano
(This post was written with Jamie Collier and cross posted on his blog Cyber Security Relations here. Check out his stuff. This post might be bit too mean to Norse for a mass-market website so RI gets the benefit).
With Norse, a cyber threat intelligence firm, imploding due to a lack of confidence in the company’s data and other associate problems, there is clear cause for concern about the nature of cyber security incident data. Although we should not jump to conclusions — Norse’s failings are unlikely to represent problems in the cyber intelligence industry more broadly — it does nonetheless lead to questions. There are two lessons to learn from Norse and the use of cyber security data.
It seems as if writing up a blog to support an article release is becoming necessary, so I will do my part to support a recent article Ryan Maness and I published at Armed Forces and Society (ungated here). This is a particularly interesting article for me because the goal of our work has always been to get to this point, to create a dataset that would allow us to empirically test cyber security questions – which is exactly what we do here.
I am tired, so very tired. This month I took a trip to Japan, would love if the entire goal of the trip was to eat Kobe beef and real sushi, but sadly, no. The goal was go to Akita International University and teach Cyber Security for a week long Winter term course. I can think of no better method of preparing a course, an activity that usually takes months and in ordinate amount of daily stress (waking up in the morning in terror realizing you forgot to prepare for class that day) than going to the north of Japan during a blizzard and forcing myself to do it over a week long period.
“Big Data” is the new hot topic in academia and in the public. With the increased ability to collect and analyze information there is a quest to mine the great sources of data that are out there in the wild. The deeper question is not if this is a positive or negative development; but just what the data means. Does our ability to analyze and display greater amounts of information actually make us more knowledgeable, and potentially more secure? I would suggest that in the cyber security field, big data is perhaps trivial, and at worst, fear inflating without careful analysis and theory.