In this episode, we interview Jim Miller, co-chair of a Defense Science Board panel that reported on how the US is postured for cyberconflict and the importance of deterrence. The short answer: deterring cyberconflict is important because our strategic cyberconflict posture sucks. The DSB report is thoughtful, detailed, and troubling. Jim Miller manages to convey its message with grace, good humor, and clarity.
In the news, Brian Egan and I find ourselves unable to turn away from the Trump-Putin meeting in Warsaw. Bottom line: by raising concerns with election hacking, Trump did and said more or less what any President would have said and done – except he failed to stick the landing with a self-serving debrief. Or if the President’s short-lived establishment of a “joint computer security unit” was self-serving, we missed it.
File this under dog bites man: Europeans are beating up on Google. The UK data protection commissioner says it was unlawful for the National Health Service to share medical data with Google’s DeepMind subsidiary, even if the goal was to provide new medical insights.
And the EU’s massive fine for Google’s abuse of its dominant position leads to musings on the regulatory foundations of some competition law doctrines – plus an enthusiastic book recommendation.
Speaking of regulating cyberspace, China’s regulatory association is demanding “core socialist values” and in-house auditors for internet content sites.
Finally, in a first, we invite Steptoe summer associate Josh Holtzman on the podcast. Josh does a fine job breaking down the issues in a court fight over warrants-and-gag-orders served on Facebook, probably as part of an investigation into violence accompanying Donald Trump’s inauguration.
As always the Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Send your questions, suggestions for interview candidates or topics to [email protected] or leave a message at +1 202 862 5785.
The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of the firm.