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-Security?

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

Re:Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security?

[tripleevenfall]

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

"The pound dropping"

[SuperKendall]

The pound is above the lowest point just after the Brexit vote - and pretty much stabilized.

There are a lot of people trying VERY hard to scare you into thinking the Brexit is a disaster, when in fact it is a blip. This whole "computer cyber-security" angle is pathetic.

Utter nonsense

[onyxruby]

There is no magic or silver bullet in security, just a set of best practices (processes), technology and people working together. If done according to any major standard defense in depth will be used. There is no such concept as 'if national politics =X then Y. Best practices are widely publicized and available to any organization or government in the world.

Whether or not an organization follows security best practices has everything to do with their culture and nothing to do with their politics. There is no tool that any given country has a lock on.

What's next? Brexit endangers air supply?

FUD

[elcor]

Fear Uncertainty Doubt The campaign to turn people's opinion has started. It seems that the good people of Britain took by surprise some very powerful goups.

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:Actual evidence

[Space cowboy]

Fuck me, that's the biggest load of bullshit I've read on Slashdot in recent memory.

How one can distil down an enormously complex situation into "too"[sic] paragraphs of dubious authenticity and simultaneously claim to understand the issues involved sufficiently to invoke two strawmen designed to be easily knocked down is beyond me, but hey, knock yourself out.

Just don't expect to be taken seriously.

1) The "representation" for the *people* in the EU is horribly undemocratic. All the people get to elect representatives to is the toothless chamber, ironically named the European Parliament. Forgive me, but any so-called parliament that can't even propose legislation, or even have the final say in enactment of the legislation graciously imposed upon it, is no parliament worth bearing the name. I'm used to the people (or at least our elected representatives) having the power, not an unelected body of career politicians out to line their own (or their own countries) pockets.

2) There is an element of racism in every society on this planet, it's a leftover from the "us" vs "them" tribal nature of our shared history. There were indeed people with money who were advertising and therefore getting their message across this time, and some of those people had a xenophobic and sometimes racist agenda, agreed. To immediately paint all those who voted leave (for whatever reason of their own) as racist, because some other person was being racist in an advertising campaign beggars belief. Clearly critical thinking in whatever country you're from is lacking (and the point stands if that country is Britain).

The issues involved were complex, and it's not anywhere near as simple as "fuck those brown people"; to imply such is frankly insulting. Perhaps those who voted to leave simply chose the probability of lesser prosperity as an acceptable compromise for real self-determination.

Re:Actual evidence

[Ash-Fox]

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.

Indeed.

Sure they don't always get their way but that's true for all unions.

You forgot the legitimate point that there was representation, however the bit where majority vote can be completely overruled by the EU commission and ignore the will of the majority which genuinely was never used to protect the interests of the people, but of the EC.

You also seem to have forgotten that areas that had an overall majority leave were places where the common fisheries policy, the common agricultural policy, the sustainable development project, the European climate change programme and so on all lead to drastic problems that affected people's life adversely.

UK MEPs have previously brought up problems such as the Common Fisheries Policy leading to overfishing (in 2013 it's powers were extended and became in some respects more problematic after 40 years of problems already) and killing the environment in some waters, there have been instances of other MEPs (particularly from nations benefiting such things) denounce them as xenophobic and wanting to keep the fish stocks to themselves (as opposed to hearing out the issue) - Majority vote wins in these cases.

But then, even if you ignore all these particular issues and just look at prosperity, it doesn't lead to a good number either. When you consider what power the EU has, when Iceland, a relatively small and no where near a big player in the world stage is able to negotiate a free trade deal with China in less than a year and the EU is going on for decades trying to negotiate one... There isn't really much in this department either.

Of course, you won't see that reported in the media that prefers polarised and sensational issues.

Second, a big push was the idea that they'd get rid of all the non-Brits if they left the EU.

That was really a remain camp's claim, not really anything to do with the leavers.

First off, amazingly racist and there is currently a big surge in racism in the UK.

A few hundred reported incidents in a nation of 65,000,000 since brexit is not really a "big surge" to me. The idea that over 50% of the UK is racist to the degree leavers are portraying it to be is somewhat laughable too. Certainly the timing represents brexit has a catalyst for some acts. I should also note that I live in a major UK city that has a history of racism, prejudice and acts of violence against foreigners, not a single racist incident since the vote.

The reality is that there were legitimate reasons and concerns to leave the EU and you're just perpetuating more of the remain camp's story and media sensationalism, you should be ashamed.

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.

Of course it will.

[Z80a]

After all, when the corrupt members of the EU finish doing their plans and turn the block into a supercountry ruled by a group of unelected dictators with its own army and thirst for the rest of europe, they will attack UK both physically and via internet to take it down and conquer the land for themselves, thus indeed putting the UK's cybersecurity at risk.