For my second international event, I went to a lecture entitled “Beyond Deterrence by Denial and Threat: Technologic Entanglement in Cyberspace” with Aaron Brantly. Brantly’s main argument was that it is very difficult to achieve deterrence by threat of punishment in an effective and efficient way. It is already costly to maintain effective security systems, however, it is even more costly to recover from a deterrence failure. A system of entanglement that promotes technological interdependence is beneficial to preventing cyberattacks. Entanglement has several benefits: it allows for heterogeneous involvement and market development, it supports shared research and development programs, it encourages mutual technological development, it encourages economic interdependence, and it allows for security throughout information sharing. In short, entanglement shifts the focus of deterrence actions from costs and benefits to gains and losses. Despite the benefits of entanglement, Brantly also agreed that deterrence through entanglement should not function in isolation. It is necessary that entanglement is supplemented by additional forms of deterrence.
Despite the fact that I did not have any previous knowledge on the topic, this presentation was rather interesting and insightful to me. I had never really considered the different methods of ensuring national cybersecurity. As a business major, I was interested in researching the ways that cyberspace security intersects with the business and technology industries. I think that cyberspace security will continue to become prevalent in the business world as we continue to increase our reliance on technology.