Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security? (helpnetsecurity.com)

The Brexit shock continues to reverberate throughout the global economic and policy worlds. Andrea Limbago from the security company Endgame responds to a poll showing that most security professionals have concerns about Brexit: Will it weaken cybersecurity because of additional bureaucratic hurdles to information sharing with the EU, as well limited cross-national collaboration in fighting cyber criminals? There is also concern about the possibility of a brain drain -- in-demand security talent pool fleeing the UK -- which could increasingly impact security and data protection.
Limbago suggests tech workers in Britain's financial sector may feel the impact, "with Bitcoin surging and the pound dropping.... London's role as the financial hub is now threatened thanks to the Brexit, the rise of digital currencies, and the EU's move toward greater digital integration." And there's also the possibility of "a push for digital sovereignty and greater national control over the Internet." But another poll found that 64% of information security professionals didn't think Brexit would affect Britain's ability to defend against cyber-attacks. Can security professionals continue their inter-nation cooperation, elevating data and security concerns over new administrative differences between Europe and the U.K.?

Comments

Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Spying?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, yes it will. Which is a good thing for everyone outside of 5 eyes.

Seriously though, fuck global panopticon.

Actual evidence

[Okian Warrior]

A recent slashdot reply caught my eye, because it succinctly sums up the situation in the UK.

In her department, which requires high-end medically-skilled professionals, her boss posted after Brexit. The basic gist was "Don't worry, everyone, your cancer diagnosis will still be safe in the hands of our department consisting almost entirely of Spanish, Italian, German, French, Polish, Greek, ...... personnel for the time being".

The important part of this post is that the jobs in this lab are denied to UK citizens due to globalism.

Of course, proponents of globalism will tell us that the UK citizens can easily move to Greece and get an equivalent job.

It could happen - right?

Globalism was sold to us as a way to increase our standard of living. It was well known that salaries would stagnate, but (we were told) the lower prices on imported goods would more than make up for the difference.

In hindsight, we see that salaries did stagnate, and also unemployment went up while per-capita gdp about doubled.

Globalism is good for a handful few people, while it has driven half the workforce to the brink of poverty.

The economic rationale says that the economy is doing great (which it is, actually) and ignores the dissatisfaction of millions of citizens as valueless.

Why should *any* country sacrifice the welfare of its citizens for the benefit of people in other countries?

If want to argue globalism, please include the analysis that indicates why having 75 million households on the brink of poverty and 10% unemployment is a good thing.

It's the difference between a rationalization and actual evidence.

Re:Actual evidence

[Darinbob]

Basically there were too things that propelled the Leave vote. First the lie that Brits had no representation in the EU (even some using the phrase "no taxation without representation"), except that the UK had representation in the EU, all member nations do. Sure they don't always get their way but that's true for all unions. Ie, California does not get it's way and is overridden by Washington but it doesn't throw a fit and demand to leave, since part of being a democracy is realizing that you don't always get the majority vote.

Second, a big push was the idea that they'd get rid of all the non-Brits if they left the EU. First off, amazingly racist and there is currently a big surge in racism in the UK. Many of those people with the wrong color were born in the UK, they can't be kicked out and the government will never allow it and will never have a majority "kick out the damn foreigners" faction. Who cares if the department has Spanish, Italian, German, Polish, and Greek staff? Is he really so stupid that the thinks a true blooded Brit would do a better job? No one is firing qualified British doctors to replace them with foreign workers, the foreign workers are getting the jobs because there's a demand for health care professionals that isn't being filled by the locals.

Re: Actual evidence

[Bing Tsher E]

First, the British are not trying to throw off a government they elected, like in your example of California. The Californians elect representatives to the Federal government. The British representatives to the EU are unelected. California did not exist as a state before becoming a part of the USA. The UK was a powerful independent state for centuries before "becoming part" of the EU.

As to your screed about racism. What total garbage. The citizens of the UK want to close the border to indiscrminant immigration. It isn't a matter of race. There are many people of many skin hues and cultural backgrounds within the Commonwealth who are British citizens. The key is that they are westernized citizens. It has nothing at all to do with race.

Re:Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security?

[tripleevenfall]

But FUD! What about the FUD! The FUD is tanking! FUD! Brexit FUD!

This

[s.petry]

The Globalists took a bit hit and are not happy. Of course the media outlets they own are trying to scare people in hopes of a fascist takeover to negate the vote. Hell, the day the votes were cast they started petitioning for another referendum trying to negate the first vote. That was the point in the claim that people were so ignorant and stupid that they had to Google search after the vote. I already spotted quite a few shill posts in this thread preaching that message.

Does cyber security get worse because people will be paid with Pounds instead of Euros? Nope, not at all. If the currency mattered we would never have an exchange. This is just more Globalist fear mongering. It's the easiest way to try and bend the public to their will, and has had huge success in the last 20 years or so.

London financial hub threatened?

[manu0601]

London's role as the financial hub is now threatened thanks to the Brexit

UK's financial industry has nothing to fear from brexit, since Article 63 of the Treaty on Functioning of UE forbids "all restrictions on the movement of capital between Member States and between (...) third countries".

Re:Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security?

[Anonymous Coward]

We're English.

We don't have a sense of humor.

Re:"The pound dropping"

[Ramze]

A lower pound to the Euro is beneficial to GB's local industries -- people buy local instead of foreign, and people living in the EU will be able to buy goods and services from GB cheaper b/c they can buy more with their euros after converting to pounds to buy GB goods/services.

International money markets are funny... When your currency goes up compared to others, you hurt exports, but help imports -- and vice versa when your currency goes down. No matter which way it moves, it hurts in some ways and helps in others.

Given that it wasn't a huge percent shift to begin with, I don't think GB is going to cry about the change even if it stays where it is as the "new normal."

Re:Liar

[Anonymous Coward]

>why would Brexit campaign demand a harder barrier to challenge

Obviously because at the time the petition was created they thought Remain would win and wanted to challenge the result.

Oliver Healey, a candidate for the far-right English Democrats party, is the petition's founder. He is now crying that his petition, which he can't cancel, has been hijacked.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-petition-second-eu-referendum-latest-news-vote-leave-a7104076.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/william-oliver-healey-referendum-petition_uk_576f8b28e4b0232d331e1b39