Digital Sovereignty, Satellites as a Cybersecurity Target, and First Amendment protection for Open-Source Code
Kevin Dominik Korte
Board Member / Angel Investor / IT Innovation & Growth Strategist / Speaker, defining and supporting execution of value-add, purpose-led strategies that deliver accelerated growth and business turnaround.
Hi there ?? Welcome to the world of a millennial technologist in the boardroom. Our world is changing. From AI and Cybersecurity to ClimateTech and Education, rapid advances in all fields have made today a different world than yesterday. Here are my stories about the things that change and don't in the boardroom and the world.
Things that Change and Will Stay
Stay: The Need for Digital Sovereignty
The United States is banning Kaspersky's software. Russian influence over the company and the resulting conflict of loyalty and care to their customers and host government required the decisive step to protect cybersecurity. In the context of the recent cyberattacks accompanying the war in Ukraine, this development raises the question of whether other countries could exploit their tech sectors for espionage and cyberattacks.
Yet, the action also underscores the need for Digital sovereignty. After all, nations, individuals, and organizations need authority and control over their digital infrastructure, data, and technology. However, you cannot be sure what is inside the code unless it is open-source. After all, the FISA courts in the US might be a far cry from the level of executive powers enjoyed by authoritarian governments. Yet, they still allow the US to comply big tech companies to spy on the users.
Thus, let us all come together to reject corporate and governmental espionage, take control of our data, and embrace digital sovereignty with open-source software.
Original Thought:
Change: Satellites are becoming an ever juicer cyber target
From SpaceX to Blue Origin, space is getting crowded. An estimated 2,877 satellites were deployed in 2023 alone, the vast majority for communication. Yet, with increasing communication routed via space, satellites are becoming an attractive target for cybercriminals. Today, whether adversaries have compromised satellites or spacecraft is becoming a matter of national security, raising the stakes of potentially exposing sensitive corporate secrets.
One of the natural first reactions to the threat is to ask why we don't just secure satellites better against attacks. Unfortunately, updating or replacing Satellites would be prohibitively expensive and an environmental disaster.
Additionally, the nature of satellite communication means that anyone with the right equipment can intercept or block communications. A metal salad bowl and USB TV stick are all you need.
Businesses must be ready to counter threats to the communication systems they rely on. While eliminating satellites from their comms mix might be one extreme solution, it is hands down the least practical. Encrypting traffic, planning for outages, and practicing disaster plans should be at the forefront of every IT department's mind.
We must prepare for the interruption that may come with bad actors attacking or disabling satellites, from changing communication channels and dealing with out-of-sync clocks to being unreachable. With a bit of intelligent preparation and a thorough look into our dependencies, we can be ready for the day when parts of the sky might fall silent and lessen the blow.
Original Thought:
领英推荐
Stay: Freedom of Speech to Protect Open-Source
The First Amendment to the US Constitution, a pivotal pillar of American democracy, resolutely proclaims: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
In the 1980s and 90s, the US tried to ban open-source software distribution to restrict the export of robust encryption algorithms. The courts reacted by finding that the First Amendment protects source code.
We see a similar drive to ban open-source AI. Whether to protect against disinformation or alleviate?privacy concerns, the claim is that banning open-source AI will prevent bad actors from gaining a technological advantage.
Yet, no one can explain how it will prevent criminals and foreign governments from using AI. Foreign governments and cyber criminals either have the means to develop their own AI or can break into corporate systems to copy proprietary AI. Thus, law-abiding citizens and societies will only be harmed if open-source AI is banned. Criminals and advisories won't care.
Thus, we must all speak out about the success of open-source software and continue to create open-source AI. The first thing you have to do is speak to have your speech protected!
Original Thought:
Around the Net and World
LibrePlanet 2024 Presentation Now Available
My LibrePlanet 2024 presentation is now available online. Learn how AI and training data define technology and why we need Free Software to lead in AI.
Learn from the Youngest
School is out in most of the US. For most school IT departments, that means now is the time for updates and tackle deferred maintenance. However, it also gives us time to learn from school IT.
About Kevin
Kevin is a board member and IT innovation and growth strategist with a proven track record of harnessing commercial acumen and finance expertise to deliver large-scale digital transformation programs with a strong focus on identity management and open-source IT infrastructure solutions.