Contesting Cyberspace and the Coming Crisis of Authority
35
Conclusion: Toward a Crisis of Authority
The drivers of cyberspace contestation outlined in the preceding sections refl ect deep
and powerful social forces that are not easily reversed. On the contrary, the momentum around each of these drivers of contestation is escalating and compounding daily.
They are also mutually reinforcing. Although there are many implications of these
contests, for cyberspace they reach down deep into and call into question some of its
core constitutive norms, rules, and principles. Everything seems to be up for grabs. In
such circumstances, it is fair to say that we have reached a point where cyberspace is
an essentially contested space, to borrow a phrase form the philosopher W. B. Gallie.
There is a crisis of authority in cyberspace, refl ecting a fundamental disagreement
about everything from acceptable behavior and rules of the road to the basis upon
which the network itself is structured and governed globally.
In such circumstances, we should expect architectonic shifts — that is, alterations to
the very nature of cyberspace itself that could change its character. Here it is important
to emphasize that cyberspace is a human-made domain and therefore subject to a
variety of technical rules and systems, all of which can be manipulated or subject to
reversal and alteration. Such architectonic shifts could come by the introduction of
shortsighted measures based out of fear and insecurity that have long-lasting and
radical repercussions. One can see glimpses of such measures in disparate areas: in the
growing number of cases of network disruption, from Nepal, China, Burma, Iran, and
Egypt, as well as in “ Internet kill switch ” legislation proposals that would empower
U.S. authorities to shut down the network in times of “ crisis ” ; in discussions of mandatory Internet identity requirements and the abolition of online anonymity or discussions about reengineering the Internet; and most shockingly, in brazen offensive cyber
attacks unleashed against supporters and detractors of Wikileaks, including theft and
public release of proprietary e-mails. Principles and rules that were once considered
fundamental and largely sacred have been subject to reexamination and questioning
and outright dismissal — from network neutrality, to peering and domain name routing
arrangements, to the legitimacy of DDoS and other types of offensive computer
attacks.
It is against this backdrop that several developments on the horizon loom large
and hold out the prospect for major design shifts in the architecture of cyberspace.
According to many analysts, 2012 is the year in which the present IP addressing
system, labeled IPv4, will run out of space and network operators and services will be
required to adopt a new solution. The rapid expansion of Internet access in the Asian
region is cited as one of the major factors contributing to the hasty exhaustion of the
4.3 billion spaces originally allocated in 1977.
55 At present, the main alternative to
the existing system, IPv6, is one that offers much less anonymity and gives operators
35
Conclusion: Toward a Crisis of Authority
The drivers of cyberspace contestation outlined in the preceding sections refl ect deep
and powerful social forces that are not easily reversed. On the contrary, the momentum around each of these drivers of contestation is escalating and compounding daily.
They are also mutually reinforcing. Although there are many implications of these
contests, for cyberspace they reach down deep into and call into question some of its
core constitutive norms, rules, and principles. Everything seems to be up for grabs. In
such circumstances, it is fair to say that we have reached a point where cyberspace is
an essentially contested space, to borrow a phrase form the philosopher W. B. Gallie.
There is a crisis of authority in cyberspace, refl ecting a fundamental disagreement
about everything from acceptable behavior and rules of the road to the basis upon
which the network itself is structured and governed globally.
In such circumstances, we should expect architectonic shifts — that is, alterations to
the very nature of cyberspace itself that could change its character. Here it is important
to emphasize that cyberspace is a human-made domain and therefore subject to a
variety of technical rules and systems, all of which can be manipulated or subject to
reversal and alteration. Such architectonic shifts could come by the introduction of
shortsighted measures based out of fear and insecurity that have long-lasting and
radical repercussions. One can see glimpses of such measures in disparate areas: in the
growing number of cases of network disruption, from Nepal, China, Burma, Iran, and
Egypt, as well as in “ Internet kill switch ” legislation proposals that would empower
U.S. authorities to shut down the network in times of “ crisis ” ; in discussions of mandatory Internet identity requirements and the abolition of online anonymity or discussions about reengineering the Internet; and most shockingly, in brazen offensive cyber
attacks unleashed against supporters and detractors of Wikileaks, including theft and
public release of proprietary e-mails. Principles and rules that were once considered
fundamental and largely sacred have been subject to reexamination and questioning
and outright dismissal — from network neutrality, to peering and domain name routing
arrangements, to the legitimacy of DDoS and other types of offensive computer
attacks.
It is against this backdrop that several developments on the horizon loom large
and hold out the prospect for major design shifts in the architecture of cyberspace.
According to many analysts, 2012 is the year in which the present IP addressing
system, labeled IPv4, will run out of space and network operators and services will be
required to adopt a new solution. The rapid expansion of Internet access in the Asian
region is cited as one of the major factors contributing to the hasty exhaustion of the
4.3 billion spaces originally allocated in 1977.
55 At present, the main alternative to
the existing system, IPv6, is one that offers much less anonymity and gives operators