Effects on:
Human Rights
Government use of malware across borders can directly and indirectly affect specific human rights including access to information, freedom of expression, the right to privacy, and freedom of association.
Given the proven potential of malware for spying, monitoring and computer control purposes, most governments that have the capacity to use malware appear determined to maintain that cyber-strategic advantage online. However, as the think tank Rand recently reported, by increasing the demand and supply of malware and by facilitating the spread of malware across borders, these states may be undermining the economic, technological, and educational potential of the Internet as well as Internet stability.
Internet Economy
Both the dark market for malware as well as the growing number of cross-border infections may reflect several market failures. We don’t know how many attacks there are, how often they occur, or how vulnerable individuals firms and governments are to attacks. Moreover, as economist Joseph Cordes notes, consumers don’t know if the cyber-security or malware they purchase works as promised. Individuals, firms, and governments would be better off if policymakers encouraged greater transparency in the supply and demand for malware. But many market actors (cyber-security suppliers and consumers as well as malware producers and consumers) benefit from opacity—they have little incentive to bring greater transparency. Nonetheless, firms (and governments) must defend against malicious information flows if they want to retain stakeholder trust and business.
The Internet is designed to ensure technical interoperability, collaborative development and transparency. But when individuals, firms and governments constantly have to defend it, that money is diverted from other more constructive uses. Moreover, as the President’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies wrote in 2013, “Surveillance and the acquisition of information might have harmful effects on commerce, especially if it discourages people—from using certain communications providers…The economic damage could be severe…In recent years, the information technology sector has been a major source of innovation and growth. Foreign concerns about U.S. surveillance can directly reduce the market share of U.S.-based technology companies and can in addition have an indirect effect of justifying protectionist measures.” Over time, the Internet could provide fewer economic benefits to the global economy and to the U.S. specifically.
Trust
Scholars have increasingly focused on the importance of trust to good governance. Sociologist Barbara Misztal notes that trust makes life more predictable; creates a sense of community among people who may not know each other; and makes it easier for people to collaborate. Some civil society groups and Internet businesses are increasingly worried that government use of malware for surveillance purposes is undermining trust in the Internet.