网络安全政策领域的安全概念化

Marek Górka
{"title":"网络安全政策领域的安全概念化","authors":"Marek Górka","doi":"10.13166/jms/176103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article will attempt to analyse securitisation theory to explore the discursive features of cyber security, using a multi-actor approach that considers the role of state and non-state actors in the creation and management of cyber security discourses.The paper aims to assess the contribution of securitization theory to the understanding of both traditional and contemporary security policy issues. More specifically, it is an attempt to reflect on the identification of the challenges facing the modern state.Growing dependence on digital technology is inevitable, making the future more threatening than the present. Cyber technology is inherently vulnerable and thus impossible to fully secure. The call for \"greater security\" becomes justified because the more a country depends on cyber technology, the more inevitable cyber threats become. They are consistently treated by government circles as a security challenge, meaning that the problem is presented as an existential threat, requiring emergency measures and justifying action beyond the normal bounds of political procedure.As some conclusion and conclusion, it is worth reiterating observations about the multi-stakeholder nature of cyber security and observations about the co-creation of this security by a wide range of actors representing different and in some cases conflicting interests. It can be argued that there is no single discourse on cyber security or cyber threats, and it is simplistic to assume that there is even a single discourse that represents every securitization actor, be it government or the private sector. This diversity explains why the assumption and logic of securitization theory can only apply to some, but not all, cyber security discourses.","PeriodicalId":16359,"journal":{"name":"Journal of modern science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conceptualising securitisation in the field of cyber security policy\",\"authors\":\"Marek Górka\",\"doi\":\"10.13166/jms/176103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article will attempt to analyse securitisation theory to explore the discursive features of cyber security, using a multi-actor approach that considers the role of state and non-state actors in the creation and management of cyber security discourses.The paper aims to assess the contribution of securitization theory to the understanding of both traditional and contemporary security policy issues. More specifically, it is an attempt to reflect on the identification of the challenges facing the modern state.Growing dependence on digital technology is inevitable, making the future more threatening than the present. Cyber technology is inherently vulnerable and thus impossible to fully secure. The call for \\\"greater security\\\" becomes justified because the more a country depends on cyber technology, the more inevitable cyber threats become. They are consistently treated by government circles as a security challenge, meaning that the problem is presented as an existential threat, requiring emergency measures and justifying action beyond the normal bounds of political procedure.As some conclusion and conclusion, it is worth reiterating observations about the multi-stakeholder nature of cyber security and observations about the co-creation of this security by a wide range of actors representing different and in some cases conflicting interests. It can be argued that there is no single discourse on cyber security or cyber threats, and it is simplistic to assume that there is even a single discourse that represents every securitization actor, be it government or the private sector. This diversity explains why the assumption and logic of securitization theory can only apply to some, but not all, cyber security discourses.\",\"PeriodicalId\":16359,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of modern science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of modern science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13166/jms/176103\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of modern science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13166/jms/176103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文将尝试分析安全化理论,探讨网络安全的话语特征,采用多行为体方法,考虑国家和非国家行为体在创建和管理网络安全话语中的作用。本文旨在评估安全化理论对理解传统和当代安全政策问题的贡献。更具体地说,本文试图反思现代国家所面临挑战的识别问题。对数字技术的日益依赖是不可避免的,这使得未来比现在更具威胁性。网络技术本质上是脆弱的,因此不可能完全安全。一个国家对网络技术的依赖程度越高,网络威胁就越不可避免,因此 "加强安全 "的呼声也就越高。政府始终将网络威胁视为一种安全挑战,这意味着问题被视为一种生存威胁,需要采取紧急措施,并有理由采取超出正常政治程序范围的行动。作为结论和总结,值得重申的是,网络安全具有多方利益相关者的性质,代表不同利益(有时甚至是相互冲突的利益)的众多参与者共同创造了这种安全。可以说,关于网络安全或网络威胁并不存在单一的论述,甚至认为存在一种单一的论述来代表每一个安全行为者(无论是政府还是私营部门)也是简单化的。这种多样性解释了为什么安全化理论的假设和逻辑只能适用于某些而非所有网络安全论述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Conceptualising securitisation in the field of cyber security policy
This article will attempt to analyse securitisation theory to explore the discursive features of cyber security, using a multi-actor approach that considers the role of state and non-state actors in the creation and management of cyber security discourses.The paper aims to assess the contribution of securitization theory to the understanding of both traditional and contemporary security policy issues. More specifically, it is an attempt to reflect on the identification of the challenges facing the modern state.Growing dependence on digital technology is inevitable, making the future more threatening than the present. Cyber technology is inherently vulnerable and thus impossible to fully secure. The call for "greater security" becomes justified because the more a country depends on cyber technology, the more inevitable cyber threats become. They are consistently treated by government circles as a security challenge, meaning that the problem is presented as an existential threat, requiring emergency measures and justifying action beyond the normal bounds of political procedure.As some conclusion and conclusion, it is worth reiterating observations about the multi-stakeholder nature of cyber security and observations about the co-creation of this security by a wide range of actors representing different and in some cases conflicting interests. It can be argued that there is no single discourse on cyber security or cyber threats, and it is simplistic to assume that there is even a single discourse that represents every securitization actor, be it government or the private sector. This diversity explains why the assumption and logic of securitization theory can only apply to some, but not all, cyber security discourses.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
5 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evolution of Secret Services in Poland. Legal and Social Dimension Special negotiations team as a temporary participating entity in the Act on companies established as a result of cross-border transformation, merger or division Is this already violence? Defining violence and domestic violence and its impact on awareness of the problem Labour incomes and economic activity in Poland Conceptualising securitisation in the field of cyber security policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1