January 17, 2017 1

Spring 2017

CYBERSECURITY 17.447-17.448 / 15.580

Room E62-350

Monday 1:00 – 3:00 pm Professor Nazli Choucri Professor Stuart Madnick Political Science Department Sloan School of Management nchoucri@mit.edu smadnick@mit.edu

With participation of Joel Brenner (CIAIL), David D. Clark (CSAIL), Howard E. Shrobe (CSAIL), Michael Siegel (Sloan)

Course Description Multidisciplinary approach to cybersecurity, focusing on sources & manifestations

of threat, operations & impacts, as well as solution strategies – in technical, economic, political, & strategic terms.

Part I is an overview of cybersecurity. Drawing on multiple perspectives, it focuses on diversity of threats, intents & capabilities – as well as uncertainties.

Part II examines geostrategic, political & economic “realities” of cybersecurity, including new markets with new policy challenges. Considers case-studies, data & metrics, agency & actors, with attendant gains & losses.

Part III is on national & international policies, formal & informal, as well as alternative solution strategies in a dynamic cyber ecology.

January 17, 2017 2

Course Schedule Week/Date Details Instructor PART I CONTEXT, CONCEPTS & CONTENTIONS 1 February 13 Introduction - Context, Meanings, Impacts, Uncertainties Choucri/Madnick 2 February 27 New Global Challenge – What We Know & Not Know Choucri 3 March 6 Cyberspace – Internet Architecture & Complexity of Security Clark 4 March 13 International Institutions to Address Cyber Threats Choucri

PART II COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES – CASES & CONDITIONS `5 March 20 National Security – Cyber Threats, & Potentials for Cyberwar Brenner 6 March 27 Failure Points & Control Fields Clark 7 April 3 Insurance for Cybersecurity & Other Imperatives Shrobe

8 April 10 Policy & Prospects – Views from Computer Science Clark PART III POLICY RESPONSES – STRATEGY & IMPLICATIONS

9 April 24 Management‘s Role in Cybersecurity: Cybersafety Analysis of the TJX case Madnick

10 May 1 Markets for Malware & Vulnerabilities Siegel 11 May 8 Understanding the Role of Organizational Cybersecurity Culture Madnick 12 May 15 Alternative Futures: What Next? Choucri/Madnick

Course Requirements

• Active Seminar Participation • Mid Term Essay • Critical Approach to Materials • End of Term Essay, OR • Class presentation – format to be announced Research Paper • Special Assignment – introduced in class

Contact Details Professor Nazli Choucri E53-493, nchoucri@mit.edu, or

January 17, 2017 3

Professor Stuart Madnick E62-422, smadnick@mit.edu SYLLABUS

COURSE OUTLINE, READINGS AND REQUIREMENTS

17.447/17.448/15.580 Spring 2017, Mondays, 1pm-3pm, E53-485

OUTLINE

PART I CONTEXT, CONCEPTS & CONTENTIONS Part I provides an overview of the cybersecurity issue area; multidisciplinary perspectives, anchored on the internet, but indicating varieties of views, threats, definitions, ambiguities; the goal is to frame a general “model” – in static form -- of sources, operational dynamics, and impacts, and highlight the technical and political issues. It highlights the key themes covered and carried throughout the course – in modular as well as linkage terms.

Week 1

Introduction – Context, Meanings, Impacts, Uncertainties Emergence of cybersecurity as an issue area, and threats to cybersecurity as a policy dilemma; intrusion modes and motivations; actors; general “ecology,“ etc., recent changes; from low politics to high politics and the like. Meanings of security; threats to and in the cyber domain. This session provides the Initial Framing for the Course.

February 13 Choucri, Madnick

Week 2

New Global Challenge – What We Know & Do Not Know Evolution of global system; transformation and change; issues of evidence; information, metrics; markets for malware, new players, new rules, shadow of cyberwar; relevance of escalation models, anonymity, and uncertainty; comparisons of “real “ vs. “cyber“ domains.

February 27 Choucri

Week 3

Cyberspace—Internet Architecture & Complexity of Security Review of Internet architecture; salient points; perspectives of firms, states (national security), individuals, commmunities formal and informal etc., state sponsored vs. private actions – does that matter? Layers view and situating actors; noting levels of analysis; and potential sources and targets of threat.

March 6 Clark

Week 4

International Institutions to Address Cyber Threats New entities and organization - FIRST, CERTS System and Others – advantages and disadvantages; what should or can be done? European Community, IMPACT, ITU, others; what seems to work what does not; expectations vs realities etc, organizational and legal imperatives.

March 13 Choucri

January 17, 2017 4

PART II COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES – CASES and CONDITIONS This Part focuses on transition from problem and theory to empirical “realities” defined in geostrategic, political, technological & economic terms; covering case narratives, metrics, data & problems thereof; emergence of new markets surrounding cybersecurity arena; new actors, activities; entities, and the various playing fields.

Week 5

National Security – Cyber Threats & Cyber War Potential Situating cybersecurity in overall national security; institutional responses and responsibilities; information coordination; accountability, redundancies, responsibility, other? Cyber Command; relation to traditional services; cyber security re: operations on the ground; software and hardware; the human element.

March 20 Brenner

Week 6

Failure Points & Control Fields Introducing control point analysis; illustrating with cases; types of vulnerabilities on Internet and in world politics; reminder of the virtual-real contexts and connections; architecture and design norms relevant to cybersecurity issues.

March 27 Clark

Week 7 Insurance for Cybersecurity & Other Imperatives Society develops insurance and other protective mechanisms for almsot all human activities. Can insuranace measures be applied to or developed for cyber security? What are the possiblities and the impediments? Who insures for what?

April 3 Schrobe

Week 8 Management’s Role in Cybersecurity: Cybersafety Analysis of the TJX Case The management of cyber systems genrates new challenges that require new ways if addressing threats to security for business, industry, government, and other major users. General assessment and case specific examples.

April 10 Madnick

January 17, 2017 5

PART III POLICY RESPONES – STRATEGY & IMPLICATIONS This Part covers national and international responses, highlights the ecology in place, actors, entities and activities, expected vs. actual impacts; challenges and problems – and proposed solution strategies. Highlights implications of Parts I, II, and III for theory and policy.

Week 9

Policy & Prospects—Views from Computer Science What does cyber policy mean from the perspective of computer science? What are the processes, tools, and instruments and the mechanisms of decision making? What is the interface with national policy making?

April 24 Clark

Week 10

Markets for Malware & Vulnerabilities Dynamic interactions in malware market contexts; actors and activities; who gains and how; illustrating via system dynamics; showing system-wide impacts of actions and reactions; addressing interests of actors shaping these markets

May 1 Siegel

Week 11

Understanding the Role of Organizational Cybersecurity Culture Introducing “House of Security“; corporate considerations; measusres, metrics, services, actors, interests etc.; attention to collaborative, competetive or other relations to government; role of overall cybersecurity policies for the private and public sectors.

May 8 Madnick

Week 12

Alternative Future: What Next? This question is addressed from multiple perspectives – technology, internet and cyber domain, geopolitics and traditional strategic context; global politics, and national security.

May 15 Choucri/Madnick

January 17, 2017 6

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

• Active Seminar Participation – Critical Approach to Materials

• Class presentation – format to be announced

• Mid Term Essay – Choices of Questions

§ Posted on April 3, 2017 § Due on April 10, 2017

• End of Term Essay -- Choices of Questions

§ Posted on May 1, 2017 § Due on May 8, 2017

• Research paper can be substituted for the End of Term Essay

§ Topic to be approved § One paragraph on focus § Brief outline § You can now proceed § Due date May 15, 2016

• Website Identification Project – to be introduced in class no later than February 27 and due on May 1

Books for Reading Assignment on Reserve in Dewey Library

• Nazli Choucri, Cyberpolitics in International Relations (MIT Press, 2012).

• Richard A. Clarke and Robert K. Knake, Cyberwar: The Next Threat to National Security and What to Do About It (Harper Collins 2010).

• P.W. Singer and Allan Friedman, Cybersecurity and Cyberwar: What Everyone

Needs to Know (2014, Oxford University Press). All other Required and Recommended Materials:

o Available on the Course Stellar-site. o Required readings for everyone o Recommended readings a for graduate students

Please Note

Chapters from the course books (listed above) are not reproduced on Course Stellar-site

All other assigned readings are on the course Stellar-site

January 17, 2017 7

Laptops: No Laptops in Class Grade distribution:

• Class attendance participation 20%

• Class presentation 15%

• Midterm (take home) 20%

• Website Identification Project 20%

• End of term Essay (Take home) 25% or

Research paper on topic of your choice with approval of instructor

January 17, 2017 8

ASSIGNED READINGS

Week 1 Introduction – Context, Meanings, Impacts, Uncertaintie February 13, 2017

Emergence of cybersecurity as an issue area, and threats to cybersecurity as a policy dilemma; intrusion modes and motivations; actors; general “ecology,“ etc., recent changes; from low politics to high politics and the like. Meanings of security; threats to and in the cyber domain. This session provides the initial framing for course. Required Braman, Sandra. 2006. Change of State. Cambridge: The MIT Press, Chapters 1, 2, and 3. Nazli Choucri, 2012. Cyberpolitics in International Relations, MIT Press, Chapters 1 and 2. Reidenberg, J.R., 2005, "Technology and internet jurisdiction." University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 153, p. 1951. Recommended Eriksson, Johan and Giampiero Giacomello, 2004, “International Relations Theory and Security in the Digital Age”, Paper Presented at the Annual International Studies Association Convention, March 17-­-20: Montreal. Bayuk, Jennifer L. et. al., 2012. Cyber Security Policy Guidebook, John Wiley & Sons, Chapters 1, 2. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.libproxy.mit.edu/book/10.1002/9781118241530;jsessionid=A05A59E88257F475807BFD68FD5A7993.f03t02

January 17, 2017 9

Week 2 New Global Challenge – What We Know & Do Not Know February 27, 2017 Evolution of global system; transformation and change; issues of evidence; information, metrics; markets for malware, new players, new rules, shadow of cyberwar; relevance of escalation models, anonymity, and uncertainty; comparisons of “real “ vs.“cyber“ domains. Required Choucri, Nazli, 2012. Cyberpolitics in International Relations, MIT Press, Chapters 3 and 4. Kobrin, S.J., 2001. "Territoriality and the governance of cyberspace," Journal of International Business Studies, vol. 32, no. 4, p. 18. Skoudis, Edward, 2009. “Evolutionary Trends in Cyberspace”. In Kramer, Franklin D., Stuart H. Starr, and Larry K. Wentz, eds, Cyberpower and National Security. Washington, DC: NDU Press and Potomac Books, pp. 147-­- 170. Kohl, Uta, 2007, Jurisdiction and the Internet: Regulatory Competence over Online Activity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 4. Johnson, David R. and David G. Post, 1996, "Law and borders: The rise of law in cyberspace." Stanford Law Review, vol. 48, pp. 1367-­-1402, May 1996.

Recommended Mahoney, James, and Kathleen Thelen, eds, 2010, Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power. New York: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 1.

Benkler, Y., 2007, The Wealth of Networks, Yale University Press. Chapters 2 and 4. Cerny, Philip G., 1995, “Globalization and the Changing Logic of Collective Action”, International Organization 49, no. 4: 595-­-625.

January 17, 2017 10

Week 3 Cyberspace – Internet Architecture & Complexity of Security March 6, 2017

Review of internet architecture; salient points; perspectives of firms, states (national security), individuals, commmunities formal and informal etc., state sponsored vs. private actions – does that matter? Layers view and situating actors; noting levels of analysis; and potential sources and targets of threat. Required Bayuk, Jennifer L., et. al., Cyber Security Policy Guidebook, John Wiley & Sons, Chapter 3. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.libproxy.mit.edu/book/10.1002/9781118241530;jsessionid=A05A59E88257F475807BFD68FD5A7993.f03t02 Nye Jr., Joseph S., “Nuclear Lessons for Cyber Security,” Strategic Studies Quarterly. Winter 2011: 18-38. Singer, W.P. and Allen Friedman, Cybersecurity and Cyberwar: What Everyone Needs to Know, Oxford University Press, 2014. Please read entire book. Parts II, III and the Conclusion will be revisited in later weeks.

Greenstein, Ran, and Anriette Esterhuysen, 2006, “The Right to Development in the Information Society”, in Human Rights in the Global Information Society, edited by Rikke Frank Jørgensen. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, Chapters 4, 8 and 12. Recommended Clark, David D., 2004, “An Insider’s Guide to the Internet,” MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Version 2.0, July 25, 2004, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

January 17, 2017 11

Week 4 International Institutions to Address Cyber Threats March 13, 2017 New entities and organization - FIRST, CERTS System and Others – advantages and disadvantages; what should or can be done? European Community, IMPACT, ITU, others; what seems to work what does not; expectations vs. realities etc., organizational and legal imperatives. Required

Mueller, Milton, and Mawaki Chango, 2008, “Disrupting Global Governance: The Internet Whois Service, ICANN, and Privacy,” Journal of Information Technology and Politics 5, no. 3: 303-­-325. Choucri, Nazli Cyberpolitics in International Relations, MIT Press, 2012, Chapters 7 and 8. Obrst, Leo, Penny Chase and Richard Markeloff, “Developing an Ontology of the Cyber Security Domain,“ The MITRE Corporation. Choucri, Nazli, Stuart Madnick and Jeremy Ferwerda, 2013. “Institutional Foundations for Cyber Security: Current Responses and New Challenges.” Information Technology for Development: 22 October, pp. 6-121. Recommended Abbott, Kenneth W. and Duncan Snidal, 2001, “Hard and Soft Law in International Governance”, in Judith L. Goldstein, Miles Kahler, Robert O. Koehane, and Anne-­-Marie Slaughter, eds. Legalization and World Politics. Cambridge, The MIT Press, pp. 37-­-72. Mueller, Milton L., 2004, Ruling the Root: Internet Governance and the Taming of Cyberspace, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, See Table 8.1 “Stakeholders List in Internet Governance.” Zacher, Mark W., 2001. “International Organizations”, in The Oxford Companion to Politics of the World, 2nd edition, Joel Krieger, ed., Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 418-­-420.

January 17, 2017 12

Week 5 National Security – Cyber Threats & Potentials for Cyberwar March 20, 2017 Situating cybersecurity in overall national security; institutional responses and responsibilities; information coordination; accountability, redundancies, responsibility, other? Cyber Command; relation to traditional services; cyber security re: operations on the ground; software and hardware; the human element. Required Wingfield, Thomas C. 2009. “International Law and Information Operations” in Kramer, Franklin D., Stuart H. Starr, and Larry W. Wentz eds. Cyberpower and National Security. Washington D.C.: National Defense University Press & Potomac Books, pp. 525-­-542. Jennifer L. Bayuk, et. al. 2012. Cyber Security Policy Guidebook, John Wiley & Sons, Chapter 5 and 7. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.libproxy.mit.edu/book/10.1002/9781118241530;jsessionid=A05A59E88257F475807BFD68FD5A7993.f03t02 Singer, W.P. and Allen Friedman, Cybersecurity and Cyberwar: What Everyone Needs to Know, Oxford University Press, 2014, Part III. “Department of Defense Strategy for Operating in Cyberspace,” July 2011. Recommended Kugler, Richard L., 2008. “Deterrence of Cyber Attacks”. In Kramer, Franklin D., Stuart H. Starr, and Larry K. Wentz, eds, 2009, Cyberpower and National Security. Washington, DC: NDU Press and Potomac Books, Inc. pp. 309 – 340. Leed, Maren, 2013. “Offensive Cyber Capabilities at the Operational Level: The Way Ahead,” September. The Center for Strategic and International Studies and Georgia Tech Research Institute.

January 17, 2017 13

Week 6 Failure Points & Control Fields March 27, 2017 Introducing control point analysis; illustrating with cases; types of vulnerabilities on Internet and in world politics; reminder of the virtual-real contexts and connections; architecture and design norms relevant to cybersecurity issues. Required Collier, Zachary A., Igor Linkov, Daniel DiMase, Steve Walters, Mark (Mohammad) Tehranipoor, and James H. Lambert, 2014. Cybersecurity Standards: Managing Risk and Creating Resilience. Computer. September: 68-73. Choucri, Nazli and David D. Clark, 2011. “Cyberspace and International Relations: Toward an Integrated System” Version 8-25 for internal ECIR review, August. Kahler, M., ed. 2009, Networked Politics: Agency, Power, and Governance. Cornell University Press, Chapters 1 and 11.

Choucri, Nazli, 2012. Cyberpolitics in International Relations, MIT Press, Chapters 5 and 6. Talbot, David, 2005, “The Internet is Broken,” Technology Review, Dec. 2005/Jan. 2006, http://www.technologyreview.com/article/16356/. Recommended Zittrain, Jonathan L., 2006, "The generative internet," Harvard Law Journal, vol. 119. Clark, David D, “Control Point Analysis,” 2012. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2032124.

January 17, 2017 14

Week 7 Insurance for Cybersecurity and Other Imperatives April 3, 2017

Society develops insurance and other protective mechanisms for almsot all human activities. Can insuranace measures be applied to or developed for cyber security? What are the possiblities and the impediments? Who insures for what? Required Lagazio, Monica, Nazneen Sherif and Mike Cushman. 2014. A multi-level approach to understanding the impact of cyber crime on the financial sector. Computers & Security 45: 58-74. Borgatti, Stephen P., Ajay Mehra, Daniel J. Brass, and Giuseppe Labianca, 2009, "Network Analysis in the Social Sciences", Science 323 (February 13, 2009): 892-­-895. David, Paul A., 2006, “Toward a Cyber a Cyberinfrastructure for Enhanced Scientific Collaboration: Providing Its ‘Soft’ Foundation May Be the Hardest Part”, in Kahin, Brian and Dominque Foray, Eds, Advancing Knowledge and the Knowledge Economy, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 431-­-453. J. R. Reidenberg, 2000, "Resolving conflicting international data privacy rules in cyberspace," Stanford Law Review, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 1315-­-1371. Arzberger, Peter, Peter Schroeder, Anne Beaulieu, Geof Bowker, Kathleen Casey, Leif Laaksonen, David Moorman, Paul Uhlir, and Paul Wouters, 2004, “An International Framework to Promote Access to Data”, Science 303 (March 2004): 1777-­-1778. Recommended Cukier, Kenneth and Viktor Mayer-Schoenberger, 2013. “The Rise of Big Data: How It’s Changing the Way We think About the World,” Foreign Affairs, May/June, 28-40.

January 17, 2017 15

Week 8: Management‘s Role in Cybersecurity: Cybersafety Analysis of the TJX Case April 10, 2017 The management of cyber systems genrates new challenges that require new ways if addressing threats to security for business, industry, government, and other major users. General assessment and case specific examples. Required

Madnick, Stuart, Xitong Li and Nazli Choucri, 2009. “Experiences and Challenges with Using CERT Data to Analyze International Cyber Security,” Working Paper CISL#2009-13, September 2009, http://web.mit.edu/smadnick/www/wp/2009-13.pdf

Anderson, Ross and Moore, 2006.“The Economics of Information Security”, Science 314 (October 2006): 610-­-613. Bayuk, Jennifer et. al., 2012. Cyber Security Policy Guidebook, John Wiley & Sons, Chapter 6. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.libproxy.mit.edu/book/10.1002/9781118241530;jsessionid=A05A59E88257F475807BFD68FD5A7993.f03t02 Fleury, Terry, Himanshu Khurana and Von Welch, 2008. “Towards a Taxonomy of Attacks Against Energy Control Systems,” Presented at IFIP International Conference on Critical Infrastructure Protection, March. Recommended Brenner, Joel, “The New Industrial Espionage,” The American Interest, Winter (January/February) 2015.

January 17, 2017 16

Week 9 Policy & Prospects – Views from Computer Science April 24, 2017 What does cyber policy mean from the perspective of computer science? What are the processes, tools, and instruments and the mechanisms of decision making? What is the interface with national policy making?

Required

Mayer, Franz C., 2001. “Review Essay: The Internet and Public International Law – Worlds Apart.” EJIL 12, no. 3: 617-­-622. Solum, Lawrence B., 2008. “Models of Internet Governance,” Public Law Research Paper No. 07-­-25 and Law & Economic Research Paper No. LE08-­-027, September 3, 2008, Champaign, Illinois: University of Illinois. Lazer, David, Alex Pentland, Leda Adamic, Sinan Aral, Albert-­-Laszlo Barabasi, Devon Brewer, Nicholas Christakis, et al, 2009. “Computational Social Science”, Science 323 (February 2009): 721-­-723. D’Elia, Danilo. “Public-private partnership: the missing factor in the resilience equation. The French Experience on CIIP.” University of Paris VIII Vincennes-Saint Denis, Paris, France. Lindsay, Jon R. “Stuxnet and the Limits of Cyber Warfare,” Security Studies. 22: 365-404, 2013. Recommended Capra, Fritjof, 2002. The Hidden Connections: Integrating the Biological, Cognitive, and Social Dimensions of Life Into a Science of Sustainability, New York: Doubleday Books. Newman, Mark, 2003. “The Structure and Function of Complex Networks,” SIAM Review 45, 167-­-256. Cite as arXiv:cond-­-mat/0303516v1.

January 17, 2017 17

Week 10 Markets for Malware & Vulnerabilities May 1, 2017 Dynamic interactions in malware market contexts; actors and activities; who gains and how; illustrating via system dynamics; showing system-wide impacts of actions and reactions; addressing interests of actors shaping these markets.

Required Anderson, Ross and Tyler Moore, 2006, “The Economics of Information Security”, Science 314 (October 2006): 610-­-613. Lessig, L., 1996, "The zones of cyberspace", Stanford Law Review, vol. 48, pp. 1403-­-1411, May 1996. Hall, R.B. and T. J., Biersteker, 2003, The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance. Cambridge University Press Ammori, Marvin, 2014. The Case for Net Neutrality: What’s Wrong With Obama’s Internet Policy. Foreign Affairs July-August: 62-73. Andres, Richard B., 2013. “Cyber-Gang Warfare: State-sponsored militias are coming to a server near you.” Foreign Policy, February 11. Recommended Powell, M. J., 1993, “Professional Innovation: Corporate Lawyers and Private Law-­-Making”, Law & Social Inquiry 18: 423-­-452. Anders, George, 2014. Letting go of an obsession with net neutrality could free technologists to make online services better. MIT Technology Review 117(6): 29-34.

January 17, 2017 18

Week 11 Understanding the Role of Organizational Cybersecurity Culture May 8, 2017 Introducing “House of Security“; corporate considerations; measures, metrics, services, actors, interests etc.; attention to collaborative, competetive or other relations to government; role of overall cybersecurity policies for the private and public sectors. Required Benkler, Y., 2001, "The battle over the institutional ecosystem in the digital environment,” Commun. ACM, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 84-­-90. Shepsle, Kenneth A., 1989. “Studying Institutions: Some Lessons from the Rational Choice Approach,” Journal of Theoretical Politics 1, no. 2 (April): 131-147. Knake, Robert K., 2010, “Internet Governance in an Age of Cyber Insecurity,” Council on Foreign Relations, Council Special Report No. 56, September 2010. Livnat, Adi, and Marcus W. Feldman, 2001. “The evolution of cooperation on the Internet”, Complexity, 6 (July/August 2001): 19-­-23. Maclean, Don. 2008. “Sovereign Right and the Dynamics of Power in the ITU: Lessons in the Quest for Inclusive Global Governance” in Drake, William J and Ernest J. Wilson III, eds. Governing Global Electronic Networks. Cambridge: The MIT Press. pp. 84-­-126 Kohl, Uta, 2007. Jurisdiction and the Internet: Regulatory Competence over Online Activity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 5. Recommended Caral, J., 2004. "Lessons from ICANN: Is self-­-regulation of the Internet fundamentally flawed?", International Journal of Law and Information Technology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1-­-31.

Giles, Jim, 2002, “When doubt is a sure thing”, Nature 418 (August 2002): 476-­-478.

January 17, 2017 19

Week 12 Alternative Futures of Cyberspace—What Next? May 15, 2017 This question is addressed from multiple perspectives – technology, internet and cyber domain, geopolitics and traditional strategic context; global politics, and national security. Required Choucri, Nazli, 2012. Cyberpolitics in International Relations, MIT Press, 2012, Chapters 10

Singer, W.P. and Allen Friedman, 2014. Cybersecurity and Cyberwar: What Everyone Needs to Know, Oxford University Press, Conclusion Hof, Robert D. “A Chinese Internet Giant Starts to Dream,” MIT Technology Review 117(5): 23-29. Wilson, Ernest J., 2008. “Conclusion: Governance of Global Electronic Networks”. In Drake, W.J., and E. J. Wilson, eds., Governing Global Electronic Networks: International Perspectives on Policy and Power, The Information Revolution and Global Politics, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press Recommended: Tyugu, Enn and Estonia Tallinn, 2011.“Artificial Intelligence in Cyber Defense.” Presented at 3rd International Cyber Conflict Conference.

Shi, Xiaoqing and Hai Zhuge, “Cyber Physical Socio Ecology,“ Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 2011: 23: 972-984. Easton, David, 1965, A Systems Analysis of Political Life, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.