Volume 1 Issue 4 | 2024 | View PDF
Paper Id:IJMSM-V1I4P107
doi: 10.71141/30485037/V1I4P107

Cybersecurity Policy Frameworks for AI in Government: Balancing National Security and Privacy Concerns

Faraz Ahmed

Citation:
Faraz Ahmed, "Cybersecurity Policy Frameworks for AI in Government: Balancing National Security and Privacy Concerns" International Journal of Multidisciplinary on Science and Management, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 43-53, 2024.

Abstract:
The Integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in government cybersecurity frameworks present both transformative opportunities and unprecedented challenges. AI makes it easier to detect threats, respond to it automatically and protect critical infrastructure, but at the same time, it presents complex risks including AI enabling cyberattacks, privacy violation from mass surveillance and ethical issues of algorithmic bias. This research examines the delicate balance policymakers strike between using AI for national security and protecting fundamental civil liberties. Through the analysis of cybersecurity frameworks, such as NIST, ISO and COBIT the research identifies main gaps for addressing AI specific vulnerabilities like adversarial machine learning and data poisoning attacks. Contemporary case studies from today show the duality of AI in cybersecurity, where it can protect digital ecosystems and sophisticated threats like deepfake enabled disinformation campaigns and autonomous hacking tools. The research provides actionable policy solutions such as the adoption of privacy preserving AI techniques, e.g., federated learning, implementation of zero trust architectures and development of international governance standards to govern the distribution of ethical AI. However, the findings were also crucially pointing that for any AI cybersecurity policy to be effective it has to be dynamic, with the ability to constantly adapt to technological advancements while maintaining robust safeguards of individual rights. Taken together, the research provides a way for governments to tap into AI’s defensive side without compromising on democratic values and outlines actionable steps to find the right balance between the need for security and the protection of privacy around an ever more AI driven world.

Keywords: Artificial Intelligence; Cyber Security; Policy Framework; NIST; ISO

References:
1. Rotta, M.J.R.; Sell, D.; dos Santos Pacheco, R.C.; Yigitcanlar, T. Digital commons and citizen coproduction in smart cities: Assessment of Brazilian municipal e-government platforms. Energies 2019, 12, 2813.
2. Micozzi, N.; Yigitcanlar, T. Understanding smart city policy: Insights from the strategy documents of 52 local governments. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10164.
3. Yigitcanlar, T.; Agdas, D.; Degirmenci, K. Artificial intelligence in local governments: Perceptions of city managers on prospects, constraints and choices. AI Soc. 2023, 38, 1135–1150
4. Norris, D.F.; Mateczun, L.; Forno, R. Cybersecurity and Local Government; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2022.
5. Norris, D.F.; Mateczun, L.; Joshi, A.; Finin, T. Cyberattacks at the grass roots: American local governments and the need for high levels of cybersecurity. Public Adm. Rev. 2019, 79, 895–904.
6. Norris, D.F.; Mateczun, L.K. Cyberattacks on local governments 2020: Findings from a key informant survey. J. Cyber Policy 2022, 7, 294–317.
7. Wolff, J.; Lehr, W. When cyber threats loom, what can state and local governments do? Georget. J. Int. Aff. 2018, 19, 67–75.
8. Hatcher, W.; Meares, W.L.; Heslen, J. The cybersecurity of municipalities in the United States: An exploratory survey of policies and practices. J. Cyber Policy 2020, 5, 302–325.
9. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity, Version 1.1. U.S. Department of Commerce, 2018. Available at: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/CSWP/NIST.CSWP.04162018.pdf.
10. BSA | The Software Alliance. Cybersecurity Frameworks and Best Practices: Recommendations for a Secure and Resilient Digital Economy. 2021. Available at: https://www.bsa.org/files/reports/bsa_cybersecurity_frameworks.pdf.
11. Newman, J.; Mintrom, M. Mapping the discourse on evidence-based policy, artificial intelligence, and the ethical practice of policy analysis. J. Eur. Public Policy 2023, 30, 1839–1859.
12. Solo, A.M. The new fields of public policy engineering, political engineering, computational public policy, and computational politics. In Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning, e-Business, Enterprise Information Systems, and eGovernment (EEE), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 18–21 July 2011.
13. Cowls, J.; Tsamados, A.; Taddeo, M.; Floridi, L. The AI gambit: Leveraging artificial intelligence to combat climate change Opportunities, challenges, and recommendations. AI Soc. 2023, 38, 283–307.
14. Kolkman, D. The usefulness of algorithmic models in policy making. Gov. Inf. Q. 2020, 37, 101488.
15. Jin, Z.; Mihalcea, R. Natural language processing for policymaking, in Handbook of Computational Social Science for Policy; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 141–162.
16. Kumar, S., Gupta, U., Singh, A. K., & Singh, A. K. (2023). Artificial Intelligence: Revolutionizing Cyber Security in the Digital Era. Journal of Computers, Mechanical and Management, 2(3), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.57159/gadl.jcmm.2.3.23064.
17. Reuters, "New York Department of Financial Services provides AI cybersecurity guidance: What to know," Reuters, Nov. 15, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/new-york-department-financial-services-provides-ai-cybersecurity-guidance-what-2024-11-15/.intelligence
18. Hashmi, E., Yamin, M.M. & Yayilgan, S.Y. Securing tomorrow: a comprehensive survey on the synergy of Artificial Intelligence and information security. AI Ethics (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00529-z.
19. M. A. Yar, M. Hamdan, M. Anshari, N. L. Fitriyani, and M. Syafrudin, “Governing with intelligence: The impact of artificial intelligence on policy development,” Information, vol. 15, no. 9, p. 556, 2024.
20. Arora, V. Comparing Different Information Security Standards: COBIT vs. ISO 27001; Carnegie Mellon University: Doha, Qatar, 2010.
21. Syafrizal, M.; Selamat, S.R.; Zakaria, N.A. Analysis of cybersecurity standard and framework components. Int. J. Commun. Netw. Inf. Secur. 2020, 12, 417–432
22. Tofan, D. Information Security Standards. J. Mob. Embed. Distrib. Syst. 2011, 3, 128–135.
23. Rumiche Huamani, R.E. Implementación de un Plan de Seguridad Informática Basado en la Norma ISO IEC/27002, Para Optimizar la Gestión en la Corte Superior de Justicia de Lima; Universidad Privada del Norte: Trujillo, Peru, 2022.
24. Azmi, R.; Tibben, W.; Win, K. Review of cybersecurity frameworks: Context and shared concepts. J. Cyber Policy 2018, 3, 258–283.
25. Cordero, J.A.V. Les normes ISO/IEC com a mecanismes de responsabilitat proactiva en el Reglament General de Protecció de Dades. IDP Rev. Internet Derecho Y Política Rev. D’internet Dret I Política 2021, 33, 7.
26. NIST. NIST Privacy Framework: A Tool for Improving Privacy through Enterprise Risk Management; U.S. Departement of Commere National Institute of Standards and Technology: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2020; p. 43.
27. Karie, N.M.; Sahri, N.M.; Yang, W.; Valli, C.; Kebande, V.R. A Review of Security Standards and Frameworks for IoT-Based Smart Environments. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 121975–121995.
28. Choo, K.-K.R.; Gai, K.; Chiaraviglio, L.; Yang, Q. A multidisciplinary approach to Internet of Things (IoT) cybersecurity and risk management. Comput. Secur. 2021, 102, 102136.
29. Leander, B.; Cauševi´c, A.; Hansson, H. Applicability of the IEC 62443 standard in Industry 4.0/IIoT. In ˇ ARES ’19, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security, Canterbury, UK, 26 August 2019; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA; Canterbury, UK, 2019; pp. 1–8.
30. Institute, I.G. Aligning COBIT, ITIL and ISO for Business Benefit: Management Summary. A Management Briefing from ITGI and OGC. IT Gov. Inst. 2005, 1, 5–62.
31. Montasari, R. (2022). Cyber Threats and National Security: The Use and Abuse of Artificial Intelligence. In: Masys, A.J. (eds) Handbook of Security Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91875-4_84
32. Salem, Aya & Azzam, Safaa & Emam, O. & Abohany, Amr. (2024). Advancing cybersecurity: a comprehensive review of AI-driven detection techniques. Journal of Big Data. 11. 10.1186/s40537-024-00957-y.
33. G. Buchholtz, “Artificial intelligence and legal tech: Challenges to the rule of law,” in Regulating Artificial Intelligence, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019, pp. 175–198..
34. M. Malatji and A. Tolah, “Artificial intelligence (AI) cybersecurity dimensions: A comprehensive framework for understanding adversarial and offensive AI,” AI and Ethics, pp. 1–28, 2024.
35. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, “2024 JCDC Priorities,” CISA, Feb. 12, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.cisa.gov/topics/partnerships-and-collaboration/joint-cyber-defense-collaborative/2024-jcdc-priorities
36. NIST SP 800-207 (2020). Zero Trust Architecture. National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-207.
37. J. O'Brien and M. McDermott, "Biden signs ambitious executive order addressing AI," AP News, Oct. 30, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://apnews.com/article/biden-ai-artificial-intelligence-executive-order-cb86162000d894f238f28ac029005059
38. Dixit, S., & Jangid, J. (2024). Asynchronous SCIM profile for security event tokens. Journal of Computational Analysis and Applications, 33(6), 1357–1371. https://eudoxuspress.com/index.php/pub/article/view/1935
39. Dixit, S., & Jangid, J. (2022). Optimizing software upgrades in optical transport networks: Challenges and best practices. Nanotechnology Perceptions, 18(2), 194–206. https://nano-ntp.com/index.php/nano/article/view/5169