Internet Security and Networked Governance in International Relations

Mueller, Milton; Schmidt, Andreas; Kuerbis, Brenden

doi:10.1111/misr.12024

Cited by 53 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Others point out that the ipv4 format simply did not have the space to accommodate a compatible extension. 3 Today, along with the upgrade to ipv6 -which as stated is proceeding extremely sluggishly, although some believe that is changing (Czyz et al 2013) -an international market has emerged for ipv4 addresses that have been allocated but not yet used (Mueller and Kuerbis 2013). The non-transition to ipv6, the trade in ipv4 addresses and the persistent use of technical tricks (middleware) allowing multiple users to 'share' a single ip address are affecting the stability of the Internet and leading to fragmentation.…”

Section: A Collective Action Problem: the (Non-)adoption Of Ipv6mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, these principles to some extent underpin the more technical aspects of Internet governance. Mueller et al (2013) describe the technical community as cooperating non-hierarchically and voluntarily to solve Internet problems of the most serious kind, including cybersecurity threats (e.g. botnets and malware) or even issues affecting routing and other central processes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Public Core of the Internet: An international Agenda for Internet Governance

Broeders¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It advised the Dutch government to make cyberspace and Internet governance a serious priority for its foreign policy. The successful organisation of the Global Conference on Cyber Space in April 2015 (gccs2015) in The Hague provided the Dutch government with an excellent stepping stone to promote its goals of a safe and open Internet through the global arena of cyber diplomacy. Dutch cyber diplomacy will be intensified in the wake of this conference, building -amongst others-on the insights and recommendations put forward in this report.The core messages in the original report and in this book are not limited to the Netherlands however, but have a global appeal. Its main argument is that the Internet's infrastructure and core protocols should be regarded as a global public good that is in need of protection against unwarranted interventions by states and other parties. Its main policy recommendation is that states should work towards establishing an international standard that identifies the Internet's core protocols as a neutral zone in which governments, pursuing their national interests, are prohibited from interfering. This is a goal that is of crucial importance for all states whose societies and economies depend on the integrity and functionality of the Internet. Increasingly, that is the vast majority of states.The original report was drawn up by a project team headed by Dennis Broeders, senior research fellow at the Council and professor of Technology and Society at Erasmus University Rotterdam. The other members of the group were Erik Schrijvers and Lisa Vermeer, both research fellows at the Council. Member of the Council Mark Bovens was also involved in the project.While writing this report, the project group consulted numerous experts in the fields of Internet governance and cybersecurity. Their comments were extremely valuable and the Council would like to thank the interviewees for their time and effort. The Council would also like to thank Jan van den Berg, Nico van Eijk, Marieke de Goede, Erik Huizer and Corien Prins, who commented on earlier versions of the Dutch report. Prof. André Knottnerus Chairman Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy summaryThe Internet's core of key protocols and infrastructure can be considered a global public good that provides benefits to everyone in the world. Countering the growing state interference with this public core requires a new international agenda for Internet governance that departs from the notion of a global public good.internet governance between the technical and the political Everyday life without the Internet has become unimaginable. It is inextricably interwoven with our social lives, our purchasing behaviour, our work, our relationship with the government and, increasingly, with our everyday objects, from smart meters to the cars we drive and the moveable bridges we cross en route. For a long time, Internet governance was the exclusive domain of what is known in Internet circles as the 'technical community'. That community laid the fo...

show abstract

Section: A Collective Action Problem: the (Non-)adoption Of Ipv6mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Public Core of the Internet: An international Agenda for Internet Governance

Broeders¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To our knowledge, other research on the architecture of the RPKI is sparse, and covers network measurement [36,43], and policy [10,34,35,42]. Our contributions are summarized in Section 7.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The potential for faulty or compromised RPKI authorities to instantaneously affect BGP routing has lead to some concern among practitioners and policy makers [1,10,34,35,39,42]. Does the RPKI create new risks that can take IP prefixes offline?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the risk of misbehaving RPKI authorities

Cooper

Heilman

Brogle

et al. 2013

Proceedings of the Twelfth ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The RPKI is a new security infrastructure that relies on trusted authorities to prevent some of the most devastating attacks on interdomain routing. The threat model for the RPKI supposes that authorities are trusted and routing is under attack. Here we discuss the risks that arise when this threat model is flipped: when RPKI authorities are faulty, misconfigured, compromised, or compelled to misbehave. We show how design decisions that elegantly address the vulnerabilities in the original threat model have unexpected side effects in this flipped threat model. In particular, we show new targeted attacks that allow RPKI authorities, under certain conditions, to limit access to IP prefixes, and discuss the risk that transient RPKI faults can take IP prefixes offline. Our results suggest promising directions for future research, and have implications on the design of security architectures that are appropriate for the untrusted and error-prone Internet.

show abstract

“…Currently, there is a consensus that it is distributed among numerous stakeholders, which includes governments, private companies, civil society networks and communities of technical experts from multiple countries (DEIBERT; ROHOZINSKI, 2010;MUELLER et al, 2013;DENARDIS, 2014). Technical arrangements are negotiated and established by private corporations and non-governmental entities; and these arrangements are, in DeNardis' (2014) words, arrangements of power.…”

Section: The Cyber Security Industrial Complexmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unraveling the Cyber Security Market: The Struggles Among Cyber Security Companies and the Production of Cyber (In)security

LOBATO¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Internet Security and Networked Governance in International Relations

Cited by 53 publications

References 49 publications

The Public Core of the Internet: An international Agenda for Internet Governance

The Public Core of the Internet: An international Agenda for Internet Governance

On the risk of misbehaving RPKI authorities

Unraveling the Cyber Security Market: The Struggles Among Cyber Security Companies and the Production of Cyber (In)security

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About