![\"Image](\"http:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/25392390163_b8392b85db_z.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
According to a recent survey by<\/span> Tech London Advocates<\/span><\/a>, London\u2019s tech experts and cyber security professionals are \u2018<\/span>overwhelmingly opposed<\/span><\/a>\u2019 to the UK\u2019s recent<\/span> decision to leave the EU<\/span><\/a>. Mainland Europe represents an<\/span> \u00a0essential source of talent for the UK<\/span><\/a>, which suffers an \u2018alarming lack of digital skills\u2019, and Brexit will likely raise barriers to Europeans\u2019 freedom to work and travel in the UK. In fact, there are concerns that a potential dip in Britain\u2019s economy may result in a technological brain drain, with British cyber professionals<\/span> seeking higher pay<\/span><\/a> in countries such as the US. Negotiating the split will involve establishing whether British law enforcement will<\/span> continue to benefit from the information sharing<\/span><\/a> arrangements of Europol\u2019s European Cybercrime Centre (EC3), and whether it will continue to reflect the<\/span> privacy and data protection legislation<\/span><\/a> of the EU or develop its own regulation standards. The attractive benefits of the EU\u2019s \u2018<\/span>digital single market<\/span><\/a>\u2019 means it\u2019s<\/span> likely Britain will continue to adhere to the data standards<\/span><\/a> of its continental counterparts in order to facilitate the flow of data across the Channel.<\/span><\/p>\n Staying with European data debates, the final changes to the US\u2013EU data sharing agreement, Privacy Shield, have been<\/span> agreed upon this week<\/span><\/a>. The new arrangement will regulate the transatlantic transfer of EU data by US companies,<\/span> replacing the \u2018Safe Harbour\u2019<\/span><\/a> model that was<\/span> struck down last October<\/span><\/a> by the European Court of Justice. The scheme features \u2018<\/span>a number of additional clarifications and improvements<\/span><\/a>\u2019 in response to concerns of US mass surveillance of European citizens. The new data transfer pact includes stronger restrictions and<\/span> establishes the role of a US ombudsman<\/span><\/a> to handle complaints over American misuse of EU data. The final version of Privacy Shield was sent to<\/span> European member states for review<\/span><\/a> this week, and the vote is expected to be held early next month.<\/span><\/p>\n Russia\u2019s<\/span> new mass surveillance bill<\/span><\/a> will<\/span> require all messaging<\/span><\/a> services operating in Russia\u2014such as WhatsApp, Telegram and Viber\u2014to provide the Federal Security Service with backdoor access to citizens\u2019 personal communications. Pitched as a counterterrorism bill, the legislation will also<\/span> necessitate ISPs<\/span><\/a> to hold customers\u2019 metadata for three years and real communication records for up to six months. The legislation has been dubbed \u2018<\/span>the big brother law<\/span><\/a>\u2019 and companies that fail to comply will be<\/span> subject to fines<\/span><\/a> of up to one million Rubles (AU$20,000). Russia\u2019s lower house, the Duma, passed the bill last week and it\u2019s now<\/span> expected to move quickly<\/span><\/a> through Russia\u2019s Federal Council and the Kremlin, into law.<\/span><\/p>\n China is also clamping down on data management, holding a<\/span> second reading<\/span><\/a> of controversial new draft rules this week. The cybersecurity law will require Chinese citizens\u2019 personal data be stored domestically, with any<\/span> request to transfer<\/span><\/a> the data overseas requiring a government security evaluation. Importantly, the legislation will<\/span> force network operators<\/span><\/a> to \u2018comply with social morals and accept the supervision of the government\u2019. While Chinese media outlets<\/span> state<\/span><\/a> that these measures as designed to \u2018protect the information infrastructure\u2019, the<\/span> bill is seen<\/span><\/a> internationally as \u2018internet censorship enshrined in legislation\u2019.<\/span><\/p>\n The US recently held its fifth annual military network defence test,<\/span> Cyber Guard<\/span><\/a>, in Virginia with nearly 1,000 participants from the military, government, private sector, academia and allied countries. The exercise, led by the US Cyber Command, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security,<\/span> required participants<\/span><\/a> to respond to a simulated network attack on US infrastructure. Over a week, participants were challenged by an active expert \u2018red team\u2019<\/span> to practice<\/span><\/a> inter-agency coordination, private sector cooperation and Five Eyes interoperability. Cyber Command is also working to establish a \u2018<\/span>Persistent Training Environment<\/span><\/a>\u2019\u2014a year-round cyber facility capable of simulating multiple scenarios simultaneously\u2014which is expected to reach initial operating capability in 2019.<\/span><\/p>\n Closer to home, the Australian Department of Defence has announced a<\/span> $12 million contribution<\/span><\/a> to the Australian National University\u2019s new innovation centre for high performance computing, data analytics and cybersecurity. The<\/span> $45 million research facility<\/span><\/a> will house 70 students, academics and staff from the Australian Signals Directorate. The initiative is part of efforts to boost the study of STEM subjects and address Australia\u2019s cyber skills shortage.<\/span><\/p>\n For some in-depth reading, check out the<\/span> Global Commission on Internet Governance: One Internet<\/span><\/i><\/a> report released by the<\/span> Centre for International Governance Innovation<\/span><\/a> and<\/span> Chatham House<\/span><\/a> this week. Notably, it proposes three potential outcomes for the internet: \u2018a dangerous and broken cyberspace\u2019, \u2018unequal gains\u2019 or \u2018broad unprecedented progress\u2019. Microsoft has also published a<\/span> new report<\/span><\/a> this week, proposing a cybersecurity norm development model for both nation states and ICT industry. The paper addresses offensive, defensive and industry norms, as<\/span> part of Microsoft\u2019s ongoing work<\/span><\/a> to \u2018advance trust in global ICT ecosystems\u2019. <\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" According to a recent survey by Tech London Advocates, London\u2019s tech experts and cyber security professionals are \u2018overwhelmingly opposed\u2019 to the UK\u2019s recent decision to leave the EU. Mainland Europe represents an \u00a0essential source of …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":390,"featured_media":27426,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[1631,391,95,500],"class_list":["post-27425","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-general","tag-brexit","tag-cyber","tag-cyber-security","tag-surveillance"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n