thinkingstring.com

So after a short train journey I am up in Wales awaiting the start of the eris@ conference, which is being run by ERISA and the Welsh Assembly. As I mentioned in an earlier post the conference is focusing on electronic crime, trends, solutions, state of play of the police forces etc. What, you may well ask, has THAT got to do with sustainability? Have I slipped back to InfoSec? Well, yes and no.

Yes; because clearly this conference is focused on cyber crime, which is of course the “other side” of infosec. That’s the easy answer so I’ll move right on to the “no” side…

No; because I will be speaking about cyber crime in the context of sustainability. If that is a leap of logic for you, here goes. First up, I don’t think you can look at anything in isolation; time and again we (the BIG “we”) have done that and have ended up misunderstanding or worse totally missing something because we slipped on the mental blinkers and ignored context. As the Internation Energy Agency says in their recently published report Energy Perspectives to 2050, “The BLUE map (see note below) is very challenging for the transport sector and requires massive decarbonisation of transport”.

Whereas the IEA believes such cuts will come from carbon capture and storage, or non-petro fuel alternatives, it is my view that we must also massively reduce the level of regular business commuting. We must take vehicles off the road and business travelers out of the air. Doing so requires us to (both) drastically expand public transport alternatives to private vehicular traffic and introduce the means and incentives to work remotely. The latter requires a far expanded use of telecommuting and teleconferencing than we have in use today. What that means is “data everywhere” and a dramatic increase in remote access to corporate systems.

Meanwhile, legislation will also eventually come into play. Around the world various countries including the USA, Japan, and the EU are currently debating such legislation, mainly inthe form of GHG “cap and trade” systems. This will place a financial value on carbon emissions. In effect, a new and very valuable currency will be born. Under the IEA’s BLUE model such carbon trading units may eventually be exchanging hands for US$500 a pop. Crime has been following money since before we even knew what carbon was, let alone invented a currency tied to it. So I believe it perfectly logical that we will see the emergence of crime around this area in the future. It is natural to me that the trading platform for CTU’s will be electronic. QED: the crime targeting that CTU trading environment and currency will be “e-crime”.

So, everything is connected. Or as they say in Wales; Bopeth chydir.

Note: The IEA refers to the necessary changes in industry as ACT model or BLUE model. The ACT model includes technologies that are currently available, or in a very advanced stage of development but perhaps short of widespread commercial availability. BLUE model technologies and changes are “to be developed”. BLUE model changes are required in order for the world to meet what the IPCC regards as the necessary GHG cuts; being 50% to 85% of 2005 levels achieved by 2050, whereas the ACT model only achieves a return to 2005 emission levels by 2050.