Suchergebnisse

Thomas Sowell said that "reality does not go away when it is ignored". The reality around Europe is changing rapidly, and EU foreign and security policy has to adapt to those changes. New security threats, power shifting from the Western world to Asia or from nation states to non-state actors, and the increasingly global character of all major challenges that Europe is to face in the next decade are forcing the EU to reform. This chapter sketches out a plan of reform around four topics: 1. Sources of European power; 2. Projection of European values; 3. European security: Comprehensive approach and strategic sovereignty; 4. Going beyond the neighbourhood – The EU as a truly global actor. These topics were chosen on the basis of public discussions during the Expert Forum held online by the European Liberal Forum in October 2020. The chapter is structured as follows. The first part briefly presents the current state of affairs, identifying major problems to be solved. The second part analyses three possible scenarios of EU foreign and security policy development—from sailing where the wind blows to executing fundamental changes in line with the liberal agenda. The final part outlines the set of policy recommendations for the preferred scenario of deep and far-reaching reforms.

In Bezug auf die Begriffsdefinition von Security Policy sind sich die Literatur sowie die verschiedenen Kriterienwerke (IT Grundschutzhandbuch, ISO/IEC 17799/BS 7799-2, COBIT) in der Informationssicherheit uneinig. Zum einen wird Security Policy als Sicherheitspolitik und zum anderen als Sicherheitsrichtlinie bezeichnet.

The gradually developing European cyber security policy tries to establish minimum standards in all EU member states with regard to prevention, resilience and international cooperation. It aims to foster national security without compromising democratic principles or unduly limiting individual liberties. However, it is hard to find a balance between these goals, and the EU's measures thus inevitably raise questions about the democratic implications of European cyber security policy. Are the institutional structures and instruments of European cyber security policy compatible with the criteria of democratic governance? In order to answer this question, this study first outlines the main challenges related to the promotion of Internet security. After that, the study presents the institutional architecture of global cyber security policy and identifies the key principles of organisation behind European cyber security policy. In conclusion, the study assesses how compatible the institutional framework of European cyber security policy is with democratic criteria and discusses ways to enhance cyber security without violating democratic principles. (author's abstract)

"This book provides a detailed analysis of the evolution of Russia's security policy. Based on extensive original research, including an analysis of official documents, political and military elite speeches, interviews, and reports, and considering the subject from the early twentieth century onwards, the book evaluates how far Russia's security policy is underpinned by "strategic asymmetry" - the acceptance by Russia of its inferior military position, and the pursuit of its strategic aims through the application of a variety of methods, military and non-military, including the manipulation of public opinion, the use of economic leverage and external security approaches - known as Russia's "hybrid war operations" - to gain the advantage over a militarily and economically superior adversary. The book discusses how Russia's security policy has been and is being applied in specific cases, including the present war in Ukraine, the Russian anti-satellite program and Russia's contemporary Afghan policy. The aim of the book is to explain how and why Russia uses different security strategies and methods using these three cases"--

Comunicació presentada al SACMAT '20: The 25th ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, celebrat del 10 al 12 de juny de 2020 a Barcelona, Espanya. ; There has been over the past decade a rapid change towards computational environments that are comprised of large and diverse sets of devices, many of them mobile, which can connect in flexible and context-dependent ways. Examples range from networks where we can have communications between powerful cloud centers, to the myriad of simple sensor devices on the IoT. As the management of these dynamic environments becomes ever more complex, we want to propose policy migrations as a methodology to simplify the management of security policies by re-utilizing and re-deploying existing policies as the systems change. We are interested in understanding the challenges raised answering the following question: given a security policy that is being enforced in a particular source computational device, what does it entail to migrate this policy to be enforced in a different target device? Because of the differences between devices and because these devices cannot be seen in isolation but in the context where they are deployed, the meaning of the policy enforced in the source device needs to be re-interpreted and implemented in the context of the target device. The aim of the paper is to present a formal framework to evaluate the appropriateness of the migration. ; This research was sponsored by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory and the U.K. Ministry of Defence under Agreement Number W911NF-16-3-0001. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S. Army Research Laboratory, the U.S. Government, the U.K. Ministry of Defence or the U.K. Government. The U.S. and U.K. Governments are authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation hereon. Jorge Lobo was also supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness under Grant Numbers TIN201681032P, MDM20150502, and the U.S. Army Research Office under agreement number W911NF1910432.