(J’accuse)

Almost every week now there are reports of major hacks and other cybercrimes, mostly committed from or by the usual suspicious countries. The hack of the personnel database of the US government, the German parliament, the kaspersky hack to name the most recent. Reports of the inherent unsafety and possible instability of the internet are also quite frequent. On the other hand it turns out that China is quite capable of censoring. So one begins to wonder why the common opinion among experts is that nothing structural can be done about it.

I don’t think the main problem is that of a serious technical overhaul. Although costly this should be possible, maybe a with few bumps. I think the main problem is the libertarian notion among these experts that the internet is a self-regulating and self-organizing entity where “freedom” reigns. And where does this flow from? I think it flows from the same interests that wants the total freedom of flow for capital, goods and labor(people). These no-boundary wishes are generally no good for local people, putting up the permanent threat that the goodies of production and jobs moves someplace else.

So besides all of the other misdoings of the political elite of the USA and the EU the fact that they leave the regulation of the internet to a set of vague bodies begins to take a heavy toll. On this elite itsself. And whereas they are still trying to defend the physical borders of states, often failing miserably, they don’t seem to be interested in defending our electronic borders at all.

Is it really so difficult to put on some charter, install an international body of trusted states (say the NATO + some countries in the East) and throw every country of that will not keep to the rules? Perhaps allowing some communications from those countries on an individual basis, requiring something like an electronic visa.