Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

First broad and systematic horizon scanning campaign and study to detect societal and ethical dilemmas and emerging issues spanning over cybersecurity solutions

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cybersecurity and cybercrime cannot exist without each other. They are not contraries, but rather two opposite poles of the same idea. Although it may seem that it is a rather black and white kind of relationship, the measures aimed at protecting innocent people raise a myriad of ethical dilemmas. This paper presents the results of a horizon scanning study aimed at identifying the ethical and human rights dilemmas that may arise in relation to cybersecurity and cybercrime; in the paper, the identified “weak signals” have been presented, that is, the ideas or concerns which are less obvious, not widely researched or present in the media. The cybersecurity-related ethical issues arise as part of the relations between the affected people and other entities; thus, in this paper, the identified dilemmas have been organized according to the nature of the relations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The even more detailed list of references for the study is available upon request.

References

  1. Humphries M (2020) Report: Garmin paid the ransomware demand. PCMagazine

  2. World Council of Churches (2020) Web meeting focuses on cyber ethical challenges of COVID-19. World Counc, Churches

    Google Scholar 

  3. Timmers P (2019) Ethics of AI and cybersecurity when sovereignty is at stake. Minds Mach 29:635–645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-019-09508-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jang-Jaccard J, Nepal S (2014) A survey of emerging threats in cybersecurity. J Comput Syst Sci 80:973–993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2014.02.005

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. P.S S, S N, M S (2018) Overview of cyber security. IJARCCE 7:125–128 . https://doi.org/10.17148/IJARCCE.2018.71127

  6. Gordon LA, Loeb MP, Zhou L (2011) The impact of information security breaches: has there been a downward shift in costs? J Comput Secur 19:33–56. https://doi.org/10.3233/JCS-2009-0398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Choraś M, Pawlicki M, Kozik R (2019) The feasibility of deep learning use for adversarial model extraction in the cybersecurity domain. pp 353–360

  8. Pawlicki M, Choraś M, Kozik R (2020) Defending network intrusion detection systems against adversarial evasion attacks. Futur Gener Comput Syst 110:148–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2020.04.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Punitha L, Saravanan T, Varnika N (2016) Impact of an electromagnetic threat on cyberspace and cyber security against EM threat. In: 2016 International Conference on Information Communication and Embedded Systems (ICICES). IEEE, pp 1–5

  10. Dean PC, Buck J, Dean P (2014) Identity theft: a situation of worry. J Acad Bus Ethics

  11. Khanna S (2018) How consumers are changing their behavior to combat ID theft. J Account

  12. Hedayati A (2012) An analysis of identity theft: motives, related frauds, techniques and prevention. J Law Confl Resolut 4:1–12. https://doi.org/10.5897/JLCR11.044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Szczepanski M, Choraś M, Pawlicki M, Kozik R (2020) Achieving explainability of intrusion detection system by hybrid oracle-explainer approach. In: Proc. of International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, IJCNN 2020, IEEE. Glasgow

  14. Akhgar B, Choraś M, Brewster B, Bosco F, Vermeersch E, Luda V, Puchalski D, Wells D (2016) Consolidated taxonomy and research roadmap for cybercrime and cyberterrorism. pp 295–321

  15. Choraś M, Kozik R, Churchill A, Yautsiukhin A (2016) Are we doing all the right things to counter cybercrime? pp 279–294

  16. Grobler M, Chamikara MAP, Abbott J, Jeong JJ, Nepal S, Paris C (2020) The importance of social identity on password formulations. Pers Ubiquitous Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-020-01477-1

  17. Frank I, Odunayo E (2013) Approach to cyber security issues in Nigeria: challenges and solution. Int J Cogn Res Sci Eng Educ 1:1

    Google Scholar 

  18. Buscher M, Easton C, Kerasidou CX, Escalante MAL, Alter H, Petersen K, Bonnamour MC, Lund D, Baur A, Quinn R, Heesen J, Jasmontaite L, Fuster GG, Boden A, Hofmann B, Stachowicz A, Choras M, Kozik R, Boersma K, Comes M, Clavell GG, Föger N (2018) The isitethical? Exchange responsible research and innovation for disaster risk management

  19. Shoemaker D, Kohnke A, Laidlaw G (2019) Ethics and cybersecurity are not mutually exclusive. EDPACS 60:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/07366981.2019.1651516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Puddephatt A, Kaspar L (2015) Cybersecurity is the new battleground for human rights. openDemocracy

  21. Pawlicka A, Jaroszewska-Choraś D, Choraś M, Pawlicki M (2020) The guidelines for stego/malware detection tools achieving GDPR compliance. IEEE Technol Soc Mag 39:60–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Delaney K (2014) A practical guide: introduction to horizon scanning in the public sector

  23. Cuhls KE (2020) Horizon scanning in foresight – why horizon scanning is only a part of the game. Futur FORESIGHT Sci 2. https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.23

  24. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (European Commission), Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation, TNO, VTT Technical Research (2016) Models of horizon scanning. How to integrate horizon scanning into European research and innovation policies

  25. Bishop P (2009) Horizon scanning why is it so hard?

  26. Rowe E, Wright G, Derbyshire J (2017) Enhancing horizon scanning by utilizing pre-developed scenarios: analysis of current practice and specification of a process improvement to aid the identification of important ‘weak signals’. Technol Forecast Soc Change 125:224–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Brown D (2007) Horizon scanning and the business environment — the implications for risk management. BT Technol J 25:208–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10550-007-0022-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Amanatidou E, Butter M, Carabias V, Konnola T, Leis M, Saritas O, Schaper-Rinkel P, van Rij V (2012) On concepts and methods in horizon scanning: Lessons from initiating policy dialogues on emerging issues. Sci Public Policy 39:208–221. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Karasalo M, Schubert J (2019) Developing horizon scanning methods for the discovery of scientific trends. In: 2019 International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (ICDAR). IEEE, pp 1055–1062

  30. Müller S (2014) Free yet secure on the internet: how can internet security be reconciled with human rights? Alumniportal Deutschl

  31. Robertson A (2019) Border agents are checking entrants’ Facebook and Twitter profiles — but we still don’t know how closely. The Verge

  32. EDRi (2018) New protocol on cybercrime: a recipe for human rights abuse? In: Eur Digit Rights

  33. Sedgwick S (2019) Ethics in technology & cyber security. In: Linkedin

  34. (2019) Cybersecurity – a matter of ethics. In: EC-Council Univ. Blog. https://blog.eccu.edu/cybersecurity-a-matter-of-ethics/

  35. Team ANP (2017) A closer look at China’s cybersecurity law — cybersecurity, or something else? Accessnow

  36. Lindskog D (2017) The top 7 ethical dilemmas reported by IT in 2016. IT World Canada

  37. Campbell-Dollaghan K (2018) Sorry, your data can still be identified even if it’s anonymized. Fast Co.

  38. Lai J, Mu Y, Guo F, Susilo W, Chen R (2017) Fully privacy-preserving and revocable ID-based broadcast encryption for data access control in smart city. Pers Ubiquitous Comput 21:855–868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-017-1045-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Jamil D, Ali Khan MN (2011) Is ethical hacking ethical? Int J Eng Sci Technol 5:3

    Google Scholar 

  40. Jackson T (2015) Can Africa fight cybercrime and preserve human rights? BBC News

  41. (2017) Cybersecurity challenges in healthcare - ethical, legal and social aspects. In: Found. Brocher. https://www.brocher.ch/en/events/274/cybersecurity-challenges-in-healthcare-ethical-legal-and-social-aspects/

  42. Finnemore M (2018) Ethical dilemmas in cyberspace. Ethics Int Aff 32:457–462. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679418000576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Grinnell R (2019) The ethical use of data. CSO

  44. Stile EM (2017) Cyber security and data privacy in Argentina. Financ. Worldw

  45. Gavirneni S (2019) The ethical dilemma of ransomware payouts. Zeguro

  46. Lee WW (2015) Risk and ethics in cyberspace. ISACA J 6

  47. Sethfors H (2017) Captchas suck. https://axesslab.com/captchas-suck/

  48. Pompom R (2018) The ethical and legal dilemmas of threat researchers. HelpNetSecurity

  49. Burstein A (2009) Legal and ethical issues facing cybersecurity researchers

  50. Bradbury D (2017) In search of an ethical code for cybersecurity. Infosecurity Mag.

  51. Martin CD (2019) EES perspective when white hats wear black hats: The Ethics of Cybersecurity. Fall Issue Bridg Cybersecurity

  52. Shou D (2012) Ethical considerations of sharing data for cybersecurity research. pp 169–177

  53. Flake H (2020) Why I [love] offensive work Why I [hate] offensive work. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1YcBqgccBcdn5-v80OX8NTYdu_-qRmrwfejlEx6eq-4E/edit#slide=id.g7dd52a5bec_0_1028

  54. Faily S, McAlaney J, Claudia I (2015) Ethical dilemmas and dimensions in penetration testing

  55. Munjal M (2014) Ethical hacking: an impact on society. Cyber Times Int J Technol Manag 7:922–931

    Google Scholar 

  56. Georg T, Oliver B, Gregory L (2018) Issues of implied trust in ethical hacking. ORBIT J 2:1–19. https://doi.org/10.29297/orbit.v2i1.77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Hatfield JM (2019) Virtuous human hacking: the ethics of social engineering in penetration-testing. Comput Secur 83:354–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2019.02.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Shinder D (2005) Ethical issues for IT security professionals. Computerworld

  59. Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology REPORT OF COMMITTEE – D ON CYBER SECURITY, SAFETY, LEGAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES

  60. (2017) Ethics in information security. IEEE Secur Priv 15:3–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2017.75

  61. Taddeo M (2019) Three ethical challenges of applications of artificial intelligence in cybersecurity. Minds Mach 29:187–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-019-09504-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Choraś M, Kozik R (2015) Machine learning techniques applied to detect cyber attacks on web applications. Log J IGPL 23:45–46

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  63. Choraś M, Pawlicki M, Puchalski D, Kozik R (2020) Machine learning - the results are not the only thing that matters! What about security, explainability and fairness? ICCS 4:615–628

    Google Scholar 

  64. Dobrygowski D, Hoffman W (2019) We need to build up ‘digital trust’ in tech. In: Wired. https://www.wired.com/preview/story/5ce82fe9b256981c3b6b2bd5

  65. Walma M Four common myths about human rights and security in cyberspace. Free Online Coalition

  66. Jay J (2020) AI and big data could introduce fresh cyber security challenges: Europol

  67. Brown D, Esterhuysen A (2019) Why cybersecurity is a human rights issue, and it is time to start treating it like one. In: APCNews. https://www.apc.org/en/news/why-cybersecurity-human-rights-issue-and-it-time-start-treating-it-one

Download references

Funding

This work has been performed under the H2020 833115 project PREVISION, which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Programme.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ITTI Sp. z o.o., Poznań, Poland

    Aleksandra Pawlicka, Michał Choraś, Rafał Kozik & Marek Pawlicki

  2. UTP University of Science and Technology, Bydgoszcz, Poland

    Michał Choraś, Rafał Kozik & Marek Pawlicki

Authors
  1. Aleksandra Pawlicka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michał Choraś
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rafał Kozik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marek Pawlicki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aleksandra Pawlicka.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There are neither any conflicts of interest nor competing interests.

Ethics approval

Not applicable

Consent to participate

Not applicable

Disclaimer

This paper reflects only the authors view, and the European Commission is not liable to any use that may be made of the information contained therein.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pawlicka, A., Choraś, M., Kozik, R. et al. First broad and systematic horizon scanning campaign and study to detect societal and ethical dilemmas and emerging issues spanning over cybersecurity solutions. Pers Ubiquit Comput 27, 193–202 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-020-01510-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-020-01510-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation