Cybersecurity and Staying Up-to-Date with Current Technologies

Introduction and Research Question

The central research question asked in this paper is: How can the United States uphold public safety and protect citizens by staying up-to-date with current, innovative technologies? 

Answering this research question will involve drawing from routine activities theory (RAT) as a framework for assessing which solutions law enforcement agencies will use to enhance cybersecurity throughout the United States. Compared to most other theoretical frameworks described in cybersecurity research, RAT suggests that the distribution of security services can mitigate criminal activities (Elmaghraby & Losavio, 2014). This is based on how local law enforcement officers identify what motivates offenders, profile suitable targets, and mark the absence of capable guardians in cybersecurity cases involving minors (Elmaghraby & Losavio, 2014). Cybersecurity in the United States must reflect legal, professional, and ethical guidelines to be enacted at the federal level to mitigate the exploitation of vulnerabilities that cause incidents such as data breaches and identity theft. 

Theoretical Framework 

As mentioned previously, RAT supports the central argument that cybersecurity in the United States must keep up-to-date with current technologies and data mining applications as law enforcement officers draw from legal, professional, and ethical guidelines. RAT has significance for defining cybersecurity as belonging to an aggregate information handling system operating at the technical, formal, and informal levels of organizations (Elmaghraby & Losavio, 2014; Goss, 2017). The technical level emphasizes the presentation of information technology (IT) in cybersecurity networks.  However, the technologies used by law enforcement officers may not always produce the most desirable long-term outcomes for maintaining public safety because of the continuation of network vulnerabilities. Goss (2017) suggested that the formal level of most organizations usually received approval for current technologies from management.  At times, management may express legitimate concerns regarding how law enforcement officers utilized information to enhance cybersecurity (Goss, 2017). 

In relation, von Solms and van Niekerk (2013) observed that the formal level of most organizations defines the boundaries by which law enforcement officers may integrate current technologies into practice. Depending on which standards apply to an organization, the formal level indicates that any improvements made to cybersecurity will also enhance public safety (Elmaghraby & Losavio, 2014; Goss, 2017; von Solms & van Niekerk, 2013).  This occurs when administrators identify clear strategic mechanisms for recovering from incidents such as data breaches and identity theft (Elmaghraby & Losavio, 2014; Goss, 2017; von Solms & van Niekerk, 2013). 

Additionally, the informal level of an organization lends support to RAT by indicating that each department of law enforcement must unilaterally internalize cybersecurity standards (Goss, 2017). This internalization ensures employees at all levels understand which current technologies fulfill public safety commitments (Goss, 2017). Major IT firms in the private sector such as Microsoft, Google, and Facebook may lend support to law enforcement agencies in the public sector (Goss, 2017; Zakrzewski, 2019). Consequently, the informal level of an organization indicates that all employees must agree to prioritize cybersecurity as having significant long-term implications for enhancing public safety through the prevention of data breaches and identity theft (Goss, 2017; Zakrzewski, 2019). Linked to RAT, all three levels of an organization inform how law enforcement agencies and other professional entities use current technologies to protect citizens from cybersecurity disasters. 

Data and Methodology

The research on RAT provides sufficient data for describing how law enforcement agencies may enhance cybersecurity by drawing from legal, ethical, and professional guidelines to improve public safety. Here, the “Smart City” paradigm suggests that RAT may help law enforcement agencies achieve instrumental, interdependent, and intelligent goals (Elmaghraby & Losavio, 2014, p. 492). This occurs by identifying which components of local or regional IT systems need critical attention (Elmaghraby & Losavio, 2014). RAT may help researchers determine whether applications of the Smart City paradigm may produce sufficient data to facilitate improvements in public safety infrastructures. However, the analytical techniques outlined in the next section suggest that keeping up-to-date with current technologies requires striking a balance between agency-level needs in law enforcement and the requirements provided by legal, ethical, and professional standards. 

Alternatively, non-binding political agreements provide data for moving forward with policy recommendations to improve the cybersecurity environment through routine activities (Elmaghraby & Losavio, 2014; Zakrezewski, 2019). More governments have embraced the need to prioritize cybersecurity in policy decision-making. Additionally, data from non-binding agreements provide value to all three levels of professional organizations—technical, formal, and informal.  The information is based on the quality of the relationship between the public and private sectors. 

Analytical Technique

To reiterate from the previous section, the Smart City paradigm is the analytical technique considered useful for supporting the central agreement. Data produced by the Smart City paradigm also draw from RAT to indicate how law enforcement agencies and other professional organizations may keep up-to-date with current technologies (Elmaghraby & Losavio, 2014).  The data is used to enhance cybersecurity in the home, at work or school, for businesses, and throughout transportation infrastructures (Elmaghraby & Losavio, 2014). The Smart City paradigm functions as a data cycle for generation and using information toward supporting information systems. It is also used to provide sources at various times and across multiple locations. 

Since public safety is a top priority for law enforcement agencies, the Smart City paradigm is also applicable toward identifying which current technologies will produce the most valuable benefits at the lowest possible cost. However, the application of this analytic technique must support the central argument in accounting for evolutions in legal, ethical, and professional standards across various industries.

References

Elmaghraby, A. S., & Losavio, M. M. (2014). Cyber security challenges in smart cities: Safety, security, and privacy. Journal of Advanced Research, 5(4), 491-497. doi:10.1016/j.jare.2014.02.006

Goss, D. D. (2017). Operationalizing cybersecurity – Framing efforts to secure U.S. information systems. The Cyber Defense Review, 2(2), 91-110. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26267345.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Acdb243150f9651ea91430b5864f01319 

von Solms, R., & van Niekerk, J. (2013). From information to cyber security. Computers & Security, 38, 97-102. doi:10.1016/j.cose.2013.04.004

Zakrzewski, C. (2018, November 23). The Cybersecurity 202: The U.S. was notably absent from a global cybersecurity pact. But American companies signed on. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-cybersecurity-202/2018/11/13/the-cybersecurity-202-the-u-s-was-notably-absent-from-a-global-cybersecurity-pact-but-american-companies-signed-on/5be9c0881b326b3929054751/?utm_term=.0e2f5687a403