“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.” With a minor alteration in tense, from past to present, this quote from Sir Charles Dickens’ “Tale of Two Cities” succinctly describes the current state of our world. Indeed, we ARE living in the best of times and in the worst of times.
Thanks to advances in technology, we can accomplish many things far more quickly and efficiently, than we did 50 years ago. Still, in many ways, life has become far more complicated. In this commentary, I draw on some of the upsides and downsides of advances in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to reinforce Dickens’ point.
There can be no denying that modern ICT has dramatically increased the speed and efficiency of doing things. For example, as recently as the 1960s, the predominant way of corresponding was through handwritten or typed letters which were placed in stamped envelopes, taken to the post office and sent to addressees via surface or air mail. Over time, we have become addicted to, and almost totally dependent on the Internet of Things (IoT).
Nowadays, we have the luxury of using our computers and personal electronic devices (PEDs) to communicate in real time with multiple people around the world, from our offices, homes, and cars. The internet is involved in practically every decision we make. Globally, nearly six billion people, or two-thirds of the world’s population, use the internet.
According to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), in mid-2022, there were more mobile phones in use (approximately 8.58 billion) than people in the world (7.95 billion).
The Internet has had a profound impact on practically every facet of life. Schools are equipped with smart classrooms that enable access to learning resources on the Internet. Textbooks are now loaded on laptops.
Airline pilots have ditched bulky, paper manuals and now use laptops to access flight data. Merchandise is bought and sold, and personal banking is done with the click of a mouse. Retail, manufacturing, healthcare, and critical infrastructure sectors like energy and transportation all rely heavily on IoT sensors, system controls, and remote monitoring.
As with every “pro” in life, there are “cons.” The reality is that every time we access the Internet, we expose ourselves to attacks by legions of savvy and committed cyber-criminals, whose life purpose is finding ways to hack into the best protected computers. Practically every month, a multinational company informs its customers that its database has been breached, and that their personal data is at risk of being used by bad actors to wipe out their bank accounts and/or to steal their identities.
Many of us would have received fake emails from would-be hackers. Last week, I was alerted by my credit card company that my card was fraudulently being used in Asia. Many private internet users have turned to cyber security providers, like Norton, McAfee, AVG, and Avast to protect confidential information, such as passwords, financial data, credit card and social security numbers, from a growing colony of viruses, spyware, ransomware, phishing and social engineering scams.
Data encryption and user authorization are also handled by these cybersecurity companies. The cyber security challenges faced by individuals pale in comparison to those faced by government agencies and private companies. Practically every Government agency, and/or mid-size and large firm has an Information Technology (IT) unit that relies heavily on cyber security providers to monitor online activity, encrypt files, maintain internal controls, and assist with compliance with national/regional regulations.
Cybersecurity Ventures, a firm that monitors cybersecurity breaches, estimates that since 2013, approximately 3.8 million records have been stolen from breaches EVERY DAY, equating to about 158,727 per hour, 2,645 per minute and 44 every second. Instructively, 95 percent of cybersecurity breaches are due to human error.
What happens when the firms that are entrusted with data protection, fail? On Friday 19 July 2024, the whole world got a very disturbing answer to this question, when a faulty update to “Falcon” software — described by experts as an “antivirus software on steroids” developed by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike Holdings Inc.—affected 8.5 million devices globally, that use Microsoft’s Windows operating system.
Luckily, the company was able to quickly identify the problem and within hours, many systems were restored. However, within that time, considerable damage had already been done. Globally, over 4,200 flights were canceled and nearly ten times as many flights were delayed.
Hospitals were forced to delay, divert, and cancel clinical procedure. The global financial system fared much better with some banks in South Africa reporting disruptions to their services. Unsurprisingly, the incident sparked concerns over the likely impact of a longer, more widespread, and more disruptive, “blue screen” event on lives and livelihoods around the world.
Suddenly, red flags are being raised about over-dependence on a handful of internet and software giants like Microsoft, with its omnipresent Windows operating system; and on cybersecurity firms like CrowdStrike. The reality is that the stronger our reliance on the IoT, the more exposed we are, to more extreme disruptions from events like the recalled CrowdStrike events, attacks from cybercriminals, and cyber-terrorists, and from space-based events, like meteor showers that can damage satellites, power grids and telecommunications infrastructure. Movie buffs would be familiar with the 2007 film “Live Free or Die Hard” in which a cyber-terrorist hacks into government and commercial computers across the United States, and takes control of the Stock Market, commandeers military aircraft, engineers blackouts, and alters traffic signals.
With the advent of artificial intelligence, there is no telling what can happen if enough bad actors get their act together. This frightening situation reminds me of a science fiction novella entitled “The Machine Stops” written by E. M.
Forster in 1928, which was “required reading” for students of GCE English Literature at the Morne Secondary School qua A’ Level College back in the mid-1970s. Given the concerns generated by last week’s CrowdStrike event, the central messages in this Forster story could not be more apt. His prescience in predicting the pervasiveness and negative impact of an Internet is quite stunning.
Much like today, the “civilised world” in Forster’s story is run by a Machine-cum-Government, which makes all critical decisions for its citizens and provides them with all the comforts they need in their identical, personal cells. Readers get early glimpses of interactive platforms —that presage FaceTime and Zoom, and webinars —used by Vashti and her son Kuno to connect with each other and with the outside world. The machine senses when its citizens are ill and dispenses medication from the ceiling of their cells.
It is forbidden for citizens to criticize The Machine, to think independently, and to dream of living outside The Machine. Kuno tries to convince his mother that living in The Machine is unreal and unhealthy. Only after an airship crashes into the city, eventually killing them, does Vashti accepts that her son was right all along about The Machine’s destructive impact on humanity.
It is frightening to contemplate what might happen if disruptions to the Internet become more frequent and widespread. The good news from experts is that, should the infrastructure connecting millions of separate databases that comprise the Internet be destroyed, it can be rebuilt, and the internet could be restored to its pre-event state. Further, they note that since the Internet is essentially a global network, it would also be unlikely the entire infrastructure could be destroyed.
They say the worst that could realistically happen would be regional outages. As reassuring as this prognosis is, it would be wise for Caribbean Governments and their development partners to prepare for the unexpected, as best as they can. This should involve creating a regional agency or unit dedicated to building the region’s resilience to extreme cyber security events.
The sooner this is done, the better..
