global trade security Archives

Emerging technologies are helping to make global trade more efficient, predictable, and easier to manage – with AI, the Internet of Things, blockchain, and quantum computing all playing significant roles.

However, with emerging technologies, there are emerging threats. Businesses invest more than $202 billion globally in cybersecurity measures alone, and this trend is likely to continue.

Although there are myriad benefits of adopting emerging technologies to support global trade, it’s wise to safeguard trade operations against increasingly sophisticated attack vectors. Let’s explore why, and how.

Emerging Technologies Transforming Global Trade

Trade operations are already adopting cost- and time-saving technologies en masse, such as:

Artificial intelligence (AI), which helps companies to automate shipment dispatch, tracking, inventory management, and chain optimization, and build detailed trend analyses. However, AI is fallible – for example, if it’s hacked, it could expose extremely sensitive data on which it’s trained.
Blockchain, which supports trade by helping companies securely record transactions with irrefutable trust, and speed up processing time. However, blockchain is vulnerable to attacks, which can lead to the leaking of assets and confidential data.
The Internet of Things (IoT), which allows devices to communicate with each other and share data. This helps companies cut down human effort and eliminate shipping and tracking errors. However, hardware can be exploited through weak security measures such as a lack of encryption.
Quantum computing, which helps trade businesses to crunch and analyze complex market data faster and in greater volumes than they traditionally might, helping companies to make more confident, reliable decisions. However, the incredible power of quantum computing can hypothetically lead to decryption of sensitive data.

Threat vectors such as distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks are surging by 82% year over year. These attacks, which broadly target IoT and are increasingly using AI, put businesses in the supply chain at serious risk of data compromise.

Cybersecurity Challenges in the Digital Trade Landscape

Despite the apparent warnings that data protection is vital in digital supply chain management, companies must navigate several key risks (and deployment challenges).

The most significant issues and challenges facing digital trade in the here and now include:

1. Control over data privacy

With bad actors able to exploit IoT devices and break into trade systems with brute-force attacks and password stuffing, companies on the global supply chain could lose data, money, and reputation due to simple mistakes. These mistakes could then slow down or make trade more expensive for other parties as they look to partner with more reliable firms.

2. Vulnerabilities in cloud systems

Many supply chain companies rely on third-party servers, devices, and applications, several in the cloud. Weaknesses within the cloud – and at the side of third parties – can leave entire supply chains open to attack.

3. IP theft

Theft of sensitive data such as IP documents, trade secrets, blueprints, and prototypes can leave companies and stakeholders open to severe financial and reputational damage. IP theft could stunt the growth and performance of major players in global trade, leading to loss of revenue, compliance fines, and even internal cuts.

4. Compliance adherence

Trade firms operating in international supply chains need to ensure that their stored and shared data is encrypted and protected, even under the increasingly complex demands of regulatory bodies. If unmet, such demands, such as those imposed by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe, could cost firms millions of dollars. These fines could put some firms out of business completely, leaving some chains without essential partners.

Ultimately, failing to take cybersecurity threats posed by emerging technologies seriously could result in mass data loss, loss of revenue and contracts, reputational damage, and regulatory fines.

Strategies for Enhancing Cybersecurity in Global Trade

Of course, the best way to approach such challenges is to be proactive and focus on over-prevention.

In most cases, it’s recommended that trade firms work closely with cybersecurity experts to design systems that can scale with cyber threats as they evolve.

Some of the best strategies for boosting cybersecurity in global trade include:

1. Following cybersecurity frameworks. With or without cybersecurity expert support, firms should consider following frameworks such as NIST, which offer guidelines and templates to ensure data is safe against modern threats. Recommended frameworks also ensure broad compliance.

2. Carefully assessing partners. Six out of ten companies on supply chains now consider cybersecurity a major buying consideration. By carefully assessing third parties’ security standards, you can be better assured your own data – and those of other partners – is also protected.

3. Encrypting data at all levels. Regardless of where data is stored and shared, operators should ensure all data read, used, and sent is encrypted against outside interception. This is especially important for trade partners with unique or particularly sensitive IPs that third parties rely on.

4. Running audits and penetration tests. Penetration testing is a reliable way to measure and account for potential security threats and vulnerabilities that may go unnoticed. Regular auditing can help businesses stay robust amid other supply chain challenges and ad hoc changes.

5. Investing in advanced strategies. While evolving technology such as AI and quantum computing can threaten data security, it’s wise for trade business operators to adopt it for their own security. For example, quantum computing could help produce stronger, more efficient threat analysis, preventing attacks and therefore strengthening reputations in global trade.

6. Collaborating with and training everyone involved. Supply chain firms should always consider collaboration as key when protecting sensitive data. By training staff carefully and raising awareness and protection capabilities with stakeholders, more people within the firm will be better prepared in the event of a cyber attack.

All of the above strategies are particularly beneficial in global supply chains simply because they prevent the threat of attacks slowing down or even permanently disrupting trade. Your security measures protect more than just your systems and IP, but global consumers and other partners, too.

Future Outlook

The future is as exciting as it is threatening for trade firms and supply chains. Companies must adopt and embrace new technologies as it is to prepare against them, and the cybersecurity landscape is always evolving.

More and more business operators are working directly with cybersecurity professionals to design scalable, protective solutions to react faster to threats and eradicate problems on sight. Given that no one can be 100% sure of the threats lurking around the corner, it’s wise to have a flexible, scalable threat response system in place so you can evolve with technological threats.

Six out of ten IT professionals see AI as vital in the fight against emerging cyber threats. With 90% of US businesses already using the technology in some capacity, AI cyber protection is well on its way to becoming necessary in sensitive supply chains where trade secrets and supply flow require critical protection.

Conclusion

Although evolving technology is bringing various cyber security challenges, AI, IoT, blockchain, and more are also helping firms on the supply chain fight back against such risks.

Instead of fearing new technology with regard to supply chain threats, trade businesses should feel empowered to embrace change – and allow cybersecurity experts to show them how AI and more can support them.

Author Name

Michael Aminzade is Vice President of Managed Compliance Services at VikingCloud and has over 26 years of experience within cyber, information security and compliance industries. Michael’s experience covers the full spectrum from internal information security where he has been the CISO for a large global service provider to running large global consulting teams.

As an industry leader, Michael often has articles published across different publications such as Computer Weekly and Compliance Today. Michael is often asked to speak at different events such as RSA, InfoSec Europe, and Black Hat.

Weighing security over efficiency

In the balance between economic efficiency and security of supply, the pendulum may be swinging back toward security. This shift will apply not only to essential medical supplies and medicines but across the full spectrum of trade. Many automotive production facilities in South Korea, Japan and elsewhere were forced to suspend operations at the onset of the coronavirus outbreak when the flow of critical components from China was interrupted.

Companies may not only rethink supplier relationships. They might also consider further diversifying their own production. Take for example the recently announced decision by Taiwanese semiconductor giant TSMC to build a $12 billion production facility in the state of Arizona, which may represent an attempt to mitigate business risks emerging as a result of geostrategic rivalries, in particular between the United States and China. The compelling economic rationale for TSMC’s Arizona facility is not readily apparent. The costs of semiconductor fabrication are relatively higher when compared to TSMC’s facilities in Taiwan, where the bulk of its manufacturing is done.

Reducing over-dependence on Asia supply chains

The TSMC facility might represent an industry step toward a more U.S.-based high technology supply chain. But there might actually be less to the proposed plant than meets the eye. By the time it is operational in 2024, it is expected to produce semiconductors based on existing (rather than next generation) technologies, and it will lack capacity to produce at a game-changing scale. The 20,000 silicon wafers the Arizona plant is expected to produce each month is only one-fifth the capacity of the larger Taiwan-based fabrication facilities.

However, as the Trump Administration has been vocal in its desire to repatriate elements of vulnerable supply chains wherever possible, the move could also represent an opportunity to hedge against the risk that more production of critical industrial products will be compelled to be manufactured and procured in the United States, something other governments are contemplating as well.

At the recent G20 Finance Ministers meeting in Riyadh, French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire — a staunch advocate of deepening economic integration — posed a question which just a few years ago would have seemed inconceivable:
“Do we want to still depend at the level of 90 per cent or 95 per cent on the supply chain of China for the automobile industry, for the drug industry, for the aeronautical industry or do we draw the consequences of that situation to build new factories, new productions, and to be more independent and sovereign? That’s not protectionism — that’s just the necessity of being sovereign and independent from an industrial point of view.”

Le Maire’s comment captures the policy debate officials around the world are wrestling with, even in countries that have traditionally been strong pro-trade and pro-integration advocates.

Doubling down on regional trade agreements

Broader strategic considerations were undoubtedly at play in the decision. Taiwan’s position as a global supplier of chips – as well as a highly sensitive flashpoint in U.S.-China relations – means that TSMC is inevitably caught up in the technology and strategic rivalry between the U.S. and China.

TSMC’s investment may not be a bellwether that U.S. companies will re-shore or that multinationals will flock to the United States. More likely, companies will build more diversity into their supply chains with more emphasis on regional trade and less reliance on a single trade partner.

This could have big implications for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Although neither China nor the United States are currently parties to the CPTPP, the agreement is a useful vehicle to achieve greater trade and investment diversification for its current members. As a self-selected, voluntary grouping of economies ostensibly committed to promoting trade and investment among members, the CPTPP could provide some degree of insulation against the surge of export restrictions.

With the CPTPP positioned to take on greater relevance in the post-COVID-19 world, Thailand, South Korea, Indonesia and the Philippines have indicated interest in joining. Japan seems to be the informal new member recruitment manager, with Japanese officials already working closely with their Thai counterparts on the mechanics of accession.

Japan’s role is not a matter of happenstance. Japanese officials understand the dangers of over-reliance on a single market. Japan relies on China for about 37 per cent of its imports of automotive parts and 21 per cent of its imports of intermediary goods overall. In light of the COVID-19 disruptions, Japan is making a concerted effort to reduce its supply chain dependencies on China. The recent stimulus bill passed by the Japanese legislature allocated US$2.2 billion to help Japanese manufacturers shift production out of China.

A lasting impact

The COVID-19 pandemic will recede at some point. But its impact on trade will endure. The world can expect to see less China-reliant supply chains and increased use of regional trade agreements, providing a particular boost to the economies of Asia that multinationals see as the alternative to China.

________________________________________________________________

Stephen Olson is a Research Fellow at the Hinrich Foundation. Over the course of his 25 year international career, Stephen has lived and worked in Asia, the Middle East, and the United States, holding senior executive positions in the private sector, international organizations, government, and academia. He is currently a Visiting Scholar at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.

This article originally appeared on TradeVistas.org. Republished with permission.

The Impact of Emerging Technologies on Global Trade Security