The digital era has enriched the list of outstanding oxymorons that already includes “military intelligence” and “competent authorities” with a new contradiction in terms: “cybersecurity.”
Last week, in response to a freedom of information request, an official from the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) mistakenly posted the personal details of 10,000 officers on the Internet. For three hours, a digital free-for-all ensued; anyone could access the surname and first initial of officers, their rank and grade, where they are based and with whom they work — including with the domestic intelligence service, MI5.
PSNI Chief Constable Simon Byrne has confirmed that republican terrorists downloaded the information. It is certainly one of the most serious breaches of secret data experienced by any police force in the UK. Will it be the last?
Illustration: Constance Chou
Sensitive data breaches are becoming commonplace. Cyberattacks by hostile state actors like Russia and China are a clear and present danger. Just this past week, it was revealed that records held by the UK’s Electoral Commission from August 2021 have been filched by hackers, but, as in Northern Ireland, technical incompetence and human error are serious threats too. An infinite amount of data is supervised by finite talents and the police who, to put it mildly, are stretched to recruit the best and the brightest — especially in areas where there is acute competition for technological talent.
The risks are plain to see. Up to 2,000 PSNI officers are considering taking legal action following the breach, according to their union, the Police Federation. As well they might, since 319 police officers were murdered and almost 9,000 injured, mostly by the Irish Republican Army (IRA) during the 30 years of violence known as the Troubles. By some measures, it was the most dangerous police force in the world in which to serve during the 1980s. Even today, there are police officers who do not let their friends know their occupation for fear of retribution. No wonder staff panicked and desperately tried to wipe their data from the Web once the alarm spread. This is hardly an atmosphere that promotes what HR would call “talent retention.”
Dissident republican paramilitaries who broke away from the IRA to reject the 1998 Good Friday Agreement still target PSNI officers. Although the worst of the violence has ended, two police officers and two prison officers have been killed since then. In February, terrorists shot Detective Chief Inspector John Caldwell several times in front of his young son and other children, inflicting “life-changing” injuries. The official threat level has risen back up from “substantial” to “severe” as a result of the leak, meaning another attack is imminent.
It was also revealed on Wednesday that in July, a police superintendent’s car had been broken into by thieves who removed a laptop and sensitive documents. Why did it take so long to admit the theft to the 200 officers and staff affected? The temporary news blackout added to paranoia in the ranks.
Members of the armed services and their families risk their lives for the British Crown on the understanding that they will be supported by the state in the event of their injury or death — the military contract. Given the historic casualties they have suffered and the continuing terrorist threat, Northern Ireland’s police officers deserve equal regard. Without their bravery, the edifice of the state would collapse. Gangsterism and the sectarian conflict between Protestants and Catholics that has historically bedeviled the province would be endemic.
Catholic officers, some 30 percent of the total force, are particularly fearful for their personal safety and the pressure that could be placed on their families living in nationalist communities. Republican extremists regard them as traitors; the terrorists would prefer that police ranks contained only the Protestant “enemy” that favors Northern Ireland’s continued membership in the UK. In fact, the Royal Ulster Constabulary was reconstituted as the PSNI in 2001 to counteract its perceived sectarian bias. Republican parties like the IRA’s political wing, Sinn Fein, that have renounced the armed struggle now accept the PSNI’s bona fides. Yet some Catholics in the PSNI have told the BBC that this breach of their security will force them to quit.
The authorities are investigating what training was given to the staff who handle freedom of information requests. As with other security breaches around the world — from those of Edward Snowden to Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning — it will be asked who was entitled to such high-level security clearances and why. At the very least, the supervisory Police Board needs a good answer to the question of who signs off on this stuff before it goes out. Yet another question is how many police officers will now have to relocate their homes and alter their work patterns. The fate of the chief constable hangs in the balance, although he has already declared he is not the resigning type.
The UK, like most advanced societies, is increasingly reliant on detailed databases to operate its public services and infrastructure. But without a better-trained workforce, such services and infrastructure will be highly vulnerable to hacking and sloppy leaks. In Estonia, I have seen schoolchildren trained from an early age to game cyberattacks from their malevolent Russian neighbor and learn advanced digital skills in the process. Elsewhere in the West, we show no such urgency or foresight. Yet the US, India and France, like the UK, have all suffered from catastrophic data breaches, intentional or otherwise.
Last month, a cyberattack on the Swedish medical company Ortivus AB led to two British health service ambulance trusts reverting to old-fashioned paper records to carry out their routine work. Old fixes for new problems — yet “back to the future” cannot be the solution to our digital deficits.
Martin Ivens is the editor of The Times Literary Supplement. Previously, he was editor of the Sunday Times of London and its chief political commentator. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
The return of US president-elect Donald Trump to the White House has injected a new wave of anxiety across the Taiwan Strait. For Taiwan, an island whose very survival depends on the delicate and strategic support from the US, Trump’s election victory raises a cascade of questions and fears about what lies ahead. His approach to international relations — grounded in transactional and unpredictable policies — poses unique risks to Taiwan’s stability, economic prosperity and geopolitical standing. Trump’s first term left a complicated legacy in the region. On the one hand, his administration ramped up arms sales to Taiwan and sanctioned
The US election result will significantly impact its foreign policy with global implications. As tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait and conflicts elsewhere draw attention away from the western Pacific, Taiwan was closely monitoring the election, as many believe that whoever won would confront an increasingly assertive China, especially with speculation over a potential escalation in or around 2027. A second Donald Trump presidency naturally raises questions concerning the future of US policy toward China and Taiwan, with Trump displaying mixed signals as to his position on the cross-strait conflict. US foreign policy would also depend on Trump’s Cabinet and
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
Republican candidate and former US president Donald Trump is to be the 47th president of the US after beating his Democratic rival, US Vice President Kamala Harris, in the election on Tuesday. Trump’s thumping victory — winning 295 Electoral College votes against Harris’ 226 as of press time last night, along with the Republicans winning control of the US Senate and possibly the House of Representatives — is a remarkable political comeback from his 2020 defeat to US President Joe Biden, and means Trump has a strong political mandate to implement his agenda. What does Trump’s victory mean for Taiwan, Asia, deterrence
RSS