Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Cyber security is one of the most imperative components of national security, as many individuals spend much of their time online. Recently, many people have transitioned from traditional services such as visiting the banks to get money or financial aid. The internet has provided websites where people can log into their accounts, contact the government, or even apply for financial assistance from the government almost effortlessly. The internet provides a space for economic analysis to the government, simplifying various ordinary online negotiations, allowing savings and a greater generation of revenues. As the internet application increases daily, the need to establish a safe space rises proportionately. In 2016, the Russian meddling incident during the presidential election reflected the greater impact that a compromise in cybersecurity could have on a nation. During these elections, Russians applied the disinformation strategy that aimed to yield a fake presidential leadup. Nevertheless, after the elections concluded successfully, President Trump enacted an aggressive approach, the ‘Madman Theory’ offense-oriented strategy, to combat any future cyber-attacks. However, the success of this approach is questionable, and it is from it where we extract the hypothesis that the president’s more aggressive approach to fighting against cyberattacks resulted in a higher than the lower prevalence of cyberattacks.
The following research uses a systemic literature review divided into three sections to source data related to the research question. Evidence has been gathered from recent books and scholarly publications because they offer expert viewpoints on the chosen issue. Secondly, Internet resources are useful because online research, news articles, and reports from professional organizations give readers an overview of pressing concerns and interpretations of these events. The third component of the literature study is dedicated to a secondary analysis of federal laws and executive orders. Because primary analysis of these documents would be time-consuming, the research article does not seek to provide a thorough summary of legislation parts, this technique was chosen.
The security risks experienced while someone is online are equally dangerous as those encountered in traditional settings. According to most virus protection services such as Webroot, the chances of being exposed while online are similar to those risks such as theft, financial damage, or harm that one experiences while being offline. Based on rules, the regulations that govern internet usage mainly focus on promoting the safety of the user’s data. Conversely, the legislation enacted to govern offline or the traditional environment mostly concentrates on the individual’s safety (Galaitsi et al., 2022). While the two domains have a significant role in a person’s life, they have varying legislative approaches. The traditional environment has its well-set rules that govern people’s behavior, ensuring everyone is safe. However, very few laws have been established to control the internet life, mainly due to the volatility and evolution of technology (Galaitsi et al., 2022). This liquidity of the internet has allowed legislatures to hold divergent views, with some certain viewing positions concerned with cybersecurity in the government necessary while others see them unnecessary.
Articles provide evidence that Trump’s move to combat the Russian attack was the genesis of higher cyber-attacks. According to The Washington’s Post provides sufficient proof that Trump’s initiative only led to devastating results rather than alleviating the attacks that the Russian government had imposed. According to this newspaper’s claims, Trump took the nation in the wrong direction by following the ‘Madman Theory,’ which failed to hold the adversaries such as Russia accountable. Additionally, the article claims that this move removed expert cyber-defendants from their positions for trivial reasons and undermined the federal government’s excellent work conducted in cybersecurity. The newspaper gives examples of people like Christopher Krebs, who was the government’s cybersecurity expert that ensured the federal government’s cyberspace was safe. According to Trump, these experts were fired since they failed to maintain election security efforts. Unequivocally, Washington Post shows the weaknesses of Trump’s decision to fire experts in cybersecurity while leaving the enemies free concurrently.
The thinning of the government’s top ranks during the Trump administration contributed to the cyber security failures during his reign. Devanny points out that Trump’s decision only narrowed the government’s maximum levels of cybersecurity experts. Some of the top positions, such as the White House Cyber-Coordinator role, are being abolished (2021. According to Devanny, this position had been occupied by Rob Joyce, an NSA official, until Trump eliminated her after the Russian cyberattacks (2021). Linkov et al. describe the removal of the White House Cyber-Coordinator as one of the biggest mistakes that Trump’s administration made in the cybersecurity sector (2019). According to Linkov et al., Rob Joyce and Chris Krebs, who Trump sucked, had the most promising skills in the fight against cyberattacks, making them the best match for these positions (2019). These authors also point out that the US senate identified the potential of some of the withdrawn seats, such as the White House Cyber-Coordinator; thus, they embarked on a motion to re-establish the center to strengthen the country’s defense systems. Converse to the senate movement, and Trump tried threatening the veto as he considered the post weak and ineffective in maintaining cybersecurity. Ideally, the opposition portrayed by Trump against establishing some strong position to combat cyberattacks points out the priorities that most the executives towards the country.
Trump’s administration ignored cybersecurity in the top ranks and left major roles to the low-level government personnel. Williams et al. claims that Trump failed to acknowledge the importance of cohesion with the government’s key components, which resulted in the atrophy of the central coordination mechanisms of cybersecurity (Galaitsi et al., 2022). According to Williams et al., Trump only entrusted his allies with the most critical roles in cyberspace security, wherein, in a real sense, the whole group was headed in the wrong direction (Galaitsi et al., 2022). On the other hand, Trump tasked government agencies such as DHS and FMI to ensure that the election security is maintained and critical infrastructure security would curtail any possible infringement of the US elections (Galaitsi et al., 2022). Cordesman also supports Williams’s et al. claims by stating that Trump only focused on the lower ranks of government, neglecting the key top levels, mainly to prevent any possible collapse in his relations with Russia (2018). Cordesman adds that Trump had his defects, such as his unwillingness to criticize Putin for causing cyberattacks by his country (2018). Based on Cordesman’s remarks, the conservative behavior of Trump towards Russia made him fire important persons in the hierarchy of cybersecurity maintenance.
Trump’s ‘Madman Approach’ theory only resulted in a lack of leadership and coordination between the White House and the individual agencies. The approach that Trump took after the 2016 elections almost cut off the coordination between the state and the local election officials. Goldsmith and Mercer claim Trump’s move in combating the Russian cyberattacks was the genesis of the discontinued cooperation between the local and the state governments (2019). This new approach made the Certified Information Systems Audit officials avoid working with the election officials due to the Trump organization’s strict rules on the local cybersecurity agencies (Woodward, 2018). Additionally, other agencies such as the FBI and the Pentagon could not correlate in cybersecurity issues, sending worries about the country’s state in cyberspace (Seng, 2021). Nevertheless, Trump’s approach seems to have cut out the interaction between the locals and the federal organization mainly due to these organizations’ differential treatment during his administration.
Trump’s decision to avoid criticizing Russian pave was for the continued decline of internet freedom. After the cyberattack, Trump failed to face Russian and blame it for the incident and vested on calming any accusations placed on Russia. Corallo et al. claims that this was the inception of cyberspace insecurity as the era of digital authoritarianism continued to rise (2021). Based on Corallo’s et al. claims, Russia is one of the countries ruled under an authoritarian government. Through cyber sovereignty, it wasn’t to spread its influence to other western nations such as the US (2021). Corallo et al. epitomizes this with Russia’s disinformation strategy to impose an attack on the US electoral systems (2021). As a result of the spread of digital authoritarianism, the democracies of most countries end up being comprised, and people lack the power to choose who they like (Jin et al., 2021). Though not proven, it is believed that Trump allied with Putin to propagate digital authoritarianism. Unequivocally, Trump’s decision to impose the ‘Madman Theory’ can be attributed to the need to join other countries in limiting internet freedom, which could have provided leeway for authoritarianism.
While some may oppose Trump’s decision, claiming that it deteriorated the state of US cybersecurity, some believe that his administration took the nation in the right direction on cybersecurity. Gagnon and Rapin point out that many people focus on the Trump-Putin relations, blurring the effectiveness of the established policy to fight cybersecurity (2021). According to Gagnon and Rapin, Trump made important advancements in cybersecurity, such as setting up the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA), which was tasked with implementing user access controls and monitoring applications and networks (2021). Kott and other authors also claim that the relaxation of the restrictions on US Cyber Command, which has the responsibility to direct, synchronize and monitor cyberspace planning, made Trump’s administration fight cybersecurity effectively. Kott et al. add that the government employees during Trump’s reign indicated good progress in several cybersecurity issues (Galaitsi et al., 2022). For instance, CISA offered support to the voting committees by providing election security. Generally, Gagnon, Rapin, and Kott ert al. that Trump himself may deserve little credit, but many good things happened during his reign.
Inconclusively, there has been a continuous use of the internet in various fields, including the execution of both financial and governmental functions. This application has predisposed people and countries to cyberattacks like the one experienced by the US during the 2016 elections. According to the hypothesis, these attacks motivated Trump to formulate an aggressive approach that resulted in higher than lower rates of cyberattacks. Several claims have supported the assumption, such as the approach failing to hold the offender responsible for the attack, thinning the government’s top ranks, overtasking the lower levels, and resulting in poor coordination between the local, state, and the federal organizations. Nevertheless, the claim on how Trump established CISA and how he strengthened the US Cyber Command negates the hypothesis as it indicates his approach resulted in lower cyberattacks. The view is true based on several claims supporting and rejecting the research question. Many premises explain why the ‘Madman Theory’ approach was ineffective in combating the issue of cyberattacks in the US.
References
Corallo, A., Lazoi, M., & Lezzi, M. (2020). Cybersecurity in the context of industry 4.0: A structured classification of critical assets and business impacts. Computers in industry, 114, 103165.
Cordesman, A. H. (2018). Trump on Russia: His Strategy Documents vs. His Meeting with Putin. Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Devanny, J. (2021). ‘Madman Theory’or’ Persistent Engagement’? The Coherence of US Cyber Strategy under Trump. Journal of Applied Security Research, 1-28.
Gagnon, F., & Rapin, A. (2021). Cybersecurity in America: The US National Security Apparatus and Cyber Conflict Management. Conflicts, Crimes and Regulations in Cyberspace, 2, 43-62.
Galaitsi, S., Trump, B. D., Keisler, J. M., Linkov, I., & Kott, A. (2022). Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2). arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.11117.
Goldsmith, J., & Mercer, S. (2019). International law and institutions in the Trump era. German Yearbook of International Law, 28.
Jin, A. S., Trump, B. D., Golan, M., Hynes, W., Young, M., & Linkov, I. (2021). Building resilience will require compromise on efficiency. Nature Energy, 6(11), 997-999.
Kott, A., Golan, M. S., Trump, B. D., & Linkov, I. (2021). Cyber resilience: by design or by intervention?. Computer, 54(8), 112-117.
Linkov, I., Roslycky, L., & Trump, B. D. (Eds.). (2019). Resilience and hybrid threats: Security and integrity for the digital world (Vol. 55). IOS Press.
Seng, T. S. (2021). Southeast Asia’s Struggle for Autonomy Amid US-China Rivalry. In Asia-Pacific Regional Security Assessment 2021 (pp. 77-89). Routledge.
Williams, C. M., Chaturvedi, R., & Chakravarthy, K. (2020). Cybersecurity risks in a pandemic. Journal of medical Internet research, 22(9), e23692.
Woodward, B. (2018). Fear: Trump in the white house. Simon and Schuster.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.