Loeb House, Harvard University, Cambridge, 12 December 2016
“It is a pleasure to greet the Boston Global Forum. I thank Governor Michael Dukakis for his long-standing support of the United Nations and his engagement across the international agenda. I am grateful to the Boston Global Forum for honouring me with its World Leader for Peace, Security and Development Award, which I accept on behalf of the talented and dedicated staff of the United Nations.
It has been a privilege to serve as Secretary-General. My decade in office has been a time of turmoil and challenge. We have seen protracted conflicts, growing inequality, rising extremism and xenophobia, and the largest numbers of refugees and displaced persons since the Second World War.
At the same time, we have opened up new horizons for progress. The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development shows that countries can overcome their divisions to act for the common good. The Paris Agreement on climate change entered into force last month – a true landmark in humankind’s efforts to address the defining threat of our time.
Our challenge is to build on these and other gains, and deepen the partnerships we have built among world leaders, the business community and civil society. One can easily be overwhelmed by the latest terrorist attack, extreme storm or outbreak of disease. But even amidst these crises, I continue to see — and believe in — the transformative power of collective action. Let us continue to work together in that spirit. Thank you again for this recognition and for your continued support of the United Nations.”
Preventing Cyber Conflict: A 21st Century Challenge
Allan Cytryn, Nazli Choucri, Michael Dukakis, Ryan C. Maness, Tuan Nguyen, Derek S. Reveron, John E. Savage, and David Silbersweig
At the 2016 G-7 Summit at Ise-Shima, Japan, countries affirmed their commitment to support an open, secure, and reliable cyberspace through the application of international law to state behavior in cyberspace, voluntary norms of responsible state behavior in peacetime, and close cooperation against malicious cyber activity. Absent from formal communiqué were statements on cyber conflict. While cyber-enabled criminal activity and espionage preoccupy cyber discussions today, dozens of countries are building military cyber commands. Given the potential devastation a cyber conflict with advanced cyber weaponry would bring civilian populations; it is essential to develop ways to prevent the proliferation of cyber weaponry. Thus far, states have shown remarkable restraint in using overt cyber weaponry, the exceptions being acts such as Stuxnet and Shamoon. It is important that the international community build upon this restrained behavior and push toward norms that would make their use taboo.
Cyber weapons are new, not well understood, and if not properly controlled, likely to lead to escalation, a process that can lead to serious unexpected consequences, including conventional war. Development costs are minuscule relative to conventional military power and has expanded the range of threats. Differentiating the intent of software designed for espionage from a cyber weapon, designed for sabotage is easily confused that can cause miscalculation. Thus, implantation of foreign software in an adversary’s military or critical infrastructure systems poses a serious threat of both harm and escalation. In a worst-case scenario, if a computer system in question consists of a state’s nuclear weapons command and control center, nuclear conflict may result especially with states locked in unresolved conflict, such as India and Pakistan.
Under the UN Charter, an attack is a use of force, to which states have the right to self-defense. We define a cyber attack to be an action launched via computer and/or networking technology that either produces physical damage equivalent to the use of force or corrupts critical information sufficient to cause damage to the national welfare akin to that produced by the use of force. We define cyber to be a conflict that largely consists of cyber attacks. Given the novelty of cyber conflict and the opportunities for miscalculation, cyber conflict has the potential to lead to conventional conflict using both kinetic and cyberspace technologies. In the event countries think they may lose a capability due to a cyberattack, they could prematurely escalate a conflict through pre-emptive military strikes.
Targets of cyber attacks could be a) a nation’s military command and control system, which includes military satellites, its logistical systems, and one of its major wartime commands; b) its economy, which includes its critical infrastructure such as power, water and banking; or c) operation of its system of governance, including its major agencies and its national electoral system. Whether the damage done by a cyber action arises to the level of force will need to determined. However, loss of GPS during a period of heightened tensions could be considered a use of force, as could the disabling of a significant fraction of the electricity grid of a state under similar circumstances. Altering the outcome of the election of a national executive, an act tantamount to the forceful replacement of the executive, may also rise to a use of force.
Because national economies are much more tightly integrated today than at any previous time in human history, cyber conflict, whether it escalates to kinetic warfare or not, is likely to cause serious economic or political damage to many states. Given how widespread a cyberattack can be impacting telecommunications, banking, and power generations, civilians are at grave risk. Citizens regardless of nationality are exposed to risks created by cyber insecurity. International cooperation is essential and countries must prioritize ways to reduce the risk of cyberwar.
Yet the use of cyber weapons that do physical harm remain rare, and we must promote their non-use further, while at the same time recognizing the proliferation of certain types of acts that continue to have real impact: espionage and disruptive cyber events. Chinese espionage on US intellectual property has had real monetary impacts in the billions of dollars. Russian disruptive campaigns against the electoral processes in the West have sown discontent in institutions among these populations. The prevention of these types of attacks should be at the forefront, as their continued use could lead to retaliation with cyber and conventional weapons, and possibly major power war. The battle over information is being fought now, and measures must be taken to stem its tide.
Progress has been made in this battle. As a result of a bilateral agreement between the United States and China struck in September 2015, the incidence of “theft of intellectual property, including trade secrets or other confidential business information, with the intent of providing competitive advantages to companies or commercial sectors” has greatly subsided. (See http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/russia-may-be-hacking-us-more-china-hacking-us-much-n664836.)
Risk reduction must begin with identification of critical assets and the risks to which they are exposed. States must then create a system to reduce risks. This will include acquiring the necessary expertise, whether available domestically or not, to reduce software vulnerabilities and cooperate with other nations to improve transparency. This cooperation can take the form of information sharing, bilateral and multilateral agreements, articulation of norms of state behavior, and the creation of risk reduction centers designed to control escalation and equipped with “hot lines” to other national risk reduction centers.
Restraint is strengthened by implementing norms against unacceptable behaviors and creates a more mindful attitude towards using cyber systems. Fostering collective action, which is necessary to protect cyber capabilities needed by individuals, groups, and societies, enhances restraint. There may be a time when the international community establishes an international center to monitor and combat cyber threats, and to coordinate actions to protect computer systems and disrupt non-state actors that operate in cyberspace. States may have to surrender some sovereignty to do this, but it may be reflective of the non-sovereign Internet.
Cyber risk reduction begins with adherence to the GGE Norms (UN A/70/174), the G7 Ise-Shima norms, and the G20 Norms. However, it goes beyond these and should include the following measures:
Sharing in depth of best practices to secure computers and networks.
Public identification of critical national infrastructure asset classes.
National prioritizationofassets by value.
Reduction of the risk of compromise of high-priority assets.
Creation and proper manning of risk reduction centers.
Establishment of regular security drills both domestically and with other risk reduction centers.
Banning of the implantation of software in another state’s high-value systems during peacetime.
Applying the law of armed conflict in cyberspace.
Improving attribution through forensics and context.
Cyber attacks present a new danger to the security of states. Thus, states are urgently encouraged to begin discussion of mechanisms to address these issues.
THE ETHICS CODE OF CONDUCT FOR CYBER PEACE AND SECURITY (ECCC)
Version 2.0
Governor Michael Dukakis, Mr. Nguyen Anh Tuan, Mr. Allan Cytryn, Prof. Nazli Choucri, Prof. Thomas Patterson, Prof. Derek Reveron, Prof. John E. Savage, Prof. John Quelch, Prof. Carlos Torres.
The Boston Global Forum’s Ethics Code of Conduct for Cyber Peace and Security (ECCC) makes the following recommendations for maintaining the security, stability and integrity of cyberspace.
Net Citizens Should
Engage in responsible behavior on the Internet, e.g.
Conduct oneself online with the same thoughtfulness, consideration and respect for others that you expect from them, both online and offline
Do not visit suspicious websites
Learn and apply security best practices, e.g.
Update software when notified by vendors.
Ensure your PC has virus protection software installed and running.
Use strong passwords, change them periodically, and do not share them.
Do not transmit personally identifiable information to unknown sites.
Maintain a healthy suspicion of email from unknown sources.
For web communication use HTTPS instead of HTTP when possible.
Policy Makers Should
Endorse and implement recommendations made by the 2015 UN Group of Government Experts (GGE), the Group of Seven (G7) and the Group of Twenty (G20). Below we summarize the important norms concerning information and communication technologies (ICTs).
[GGE] International law, including the UN Charter, applies online.
[GGE] States should help limit harmful uses of ICTs, especially those that threaten international peace and security.
[GGE] States should recognize that good attribution in cyberspace is difficult to obtain, which means miscalculation in response to cyber incidents is possible.
[GGE] States should not knowingly allow their territory to be used for malicious ICT activity.
[GGE] States should assist other states victimized by an ICT attack.
[GGE] States, in managing ICT activities, should respect the Human Rights Council and UN General Assembly resolutions on privacy and freedom of expression.
[GGE] States should protect their critical infrastructure from ICT threats.
[GGE] A state should not conduct or permit ICT use that damages the critical infrastructure of another state or impairs its operations.
[GGE] States should work to ensure the integrity of the supply chain so as to maintain confidence in the security of ICT products.
[GGE] States should prevent the proliferation of malicious ICT tools and techniques and the use of harmful hidden functions.
[GGE] States should encourage reporting of ICT vulnerabilities and the sharing of remedies for them.
[GGE] States should not knowingly attempt to harm the operations of a computer emergency response team. Nor should it use such a team for malicious international activity.
[G7] No state should conduct or support ICT-enabled theft of intellectual property, trade secrets or other confidential business information for commercial gain.
[G7] If ICT activity amounts to the use of force (an armed attack), states can invoke Article 51 of the UN Charter in response.
[G7] States should collaborate on research and development on security, privacy and resilience.
[G7] States are encouraged to join the Budapest Convention.
IT Engineers Should
Apply best practices in the design, implementation and testing of hardware and software products so as to
Avoid ICT vulnerabilities,
Protect user privacy and data
Make use of the NIST “Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity” as a guide for improving the security of critical applications.
Business Firms and Business Leaders Should
Take responsibility for handling sensitive corporate data stored electronically.
Create employment criteria to ensure that employees are qualified to design and implement products and services that meet high security standards.
Ensure that IT engineers are kept abreast of the latest ICT security threats.
Implement effective Cyber Resilience in your business.
Engage in information sharing of ICT hazards, subject to reasonable safeguards, with other companies in similar businesses.
Educators, Influencers/Institutions Should
Teach the responsibilities of net citizens described above, including fostering good behavior and avoidance of malicious activity.
Ensure that IT engineers are taught the skills necessary to produce safe, reliable and secure ICT products and services.
Educate and lead global citizens to support and implement the ECCC.
Create honors and awards to recognize outstanding individuals who contribute greatly to a secure and safe cyberspace.
UNESCO Chair in Global Learning and Global Citizenship Education recognized by the Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias.
December 13, 2016
UCLA Professor of Education Carlos Alberto Torres has received a Doutoramento Honoris Causa from the Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias. The prestigious private university has campuses in Portugal, Brazil, and throughout Africa.
“It is with a deep feeling of happiness, pleasure and humility that I receive this Honorary Doctorate from this exalted place of study,” said Torres at a ceremony which took place in Lisbon in October in honor of himself and fellow recipient António Manuel Sampaio da Nóvoa of the University of Lisbon. “As professors, we express deep beliefs we have come to in the process of research and theoretical reflection. Ours is an existential dialogue involving theory, investigation, and praxis that makes the experience and meaning of disciplinary practice a quasi sacred act; an act of respect for the truth, even if truth is always a social construct. Thus, as professors, we are cultural workers and, because all narratives are culturally constructed, we need to question them.”
Three of Torres’ books on Brazilian philosopher Paulo Freire were written in Portuguese, including “Dialogue with Paulo Freire” (1979); “Consciousness and history: Paulo Freire’s Educative Praxis” (1979); and “A Critical Reading of Paulo Freire” (1981). In addition, Torres’ first novel, “Sir Charles’ Manuscript” (2005) was written in Portuguese.
Professor Torres also spoke in congratulations to UN General Secretary Ban Ki-moon, who was has been named Global Citizen of the Year at the observance of Global Cybersecurity Day on December 12 at Harvard University.
For a video of Professor Torres at the Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, click here.
The 2017 Address will be delivered in the Office of the Khanh Hoa Governor, Nha Trang City, Vietnam.
Starting January 1, 2017, Global Citizenship Education Network is establishing an Annual Distinguished Address. This event will be hosted by a world top thinker, great professor, or one of the world’s most influential individuals, during which, he or she will present the Global Citizenship Education Network New Year Memorandum.
To start the new tradition, Professor Carlos Alberto Torres, Chair of UNESCO-UCLA Chair in Global Learning and Global Citizenship Education, and Co-Chair of the Global Citizenship Education Network, will present the first Distinguished Address in Hanoi, Vietnam.
Date: January 1, 2017 Time : 8:00 am, GMT, January 1, 2017 ( 3:00 pm, January 1, 2017, at 3pm (Vietnam), 8:00am (GMT) Location: Conference Room, Office of Khanh Hoa Governor, Nha Trang City, Vietnam Live Broadcast: Global Citizenship Education Network’s GCE.GSEIS.UCLA.EDU
About The 2017 Speaker
Dr. Carlos Alberto Torres is a Member of the Board of Thinkers, Boston Global Forum; Distinguished Professor of Education; Director, UCLA Paulo Freire Institute; UNESCO Chair in Global Learning and Global Citizenship Education.
Dr. Carlos Alberto Torres is a political sociologist of education, a published poet and short story author. He did his undergraduate work in sociology in Argentina (B.A. honors and teaching credential in Sociology, Universidad del Salvador), his graduate work in Mexico (M.A. Political Science. FLACSO) and the United States (Master of Arts and Ph.D. in International Development Education, Stanford University), and post-doctoral studies in educational foundations in Canada (University of Alberta). He is a Professor of Social Science and Comparative Education at the UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies and Chair of UNESCO-UCLA in Global Learning and Global Citizenship Education.
In 1991, in partnership with several colleagues, he created the Paulo Freire Institute, PFI, and is currently serving as its Founding Director at the Graduate School of Education and Information Studies at UCLA. He also served as director of the UCLA Latin American Center. Dr. Torres has been a Visiting Professor in universities in North America, Latin America, Europe, Asia and Africa. He has lectured throughout Latin America and the United States, and in universities in England, Japan, Italy, Spain, Tanzania, Finland, Mozambique, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Canada, Costa Rica, Portugal, Taiwan, Korea, Sweden and South Africa.
Speech about Global Citizen Scorecard by Mr. Nguyen Anh Tuan
“Good afternoon. I want to talk briefly today about an idea for a new Boston Global Forum program. The program would aim to recognize and encourage global citizens.
An outline of the proposed program is provided in the handout.
**
The Boston Global Forum is partnering with UCLA in on Global Citizen Education. The question is what BGF can do for its part.
What’s being proposed is a program that would identify GLOBAL CITIZENS, acknowledge their status, connect them through a network, and encourage them to take a leadership role in Global Citizen education.
The program would be conducted entirely through the Internet.
One component would be a GLOBAL CITIZEN SCORECARD. Scorecards have found regular use in recent years as a way to measure individual achievement and progress.
In our case, the SCORECARD would test whether individuals have the values, outlooks, and behaviors associated with global citizenship—for example, whether they respect and show tolerance of those who have different political or religious affiliations than the ones they hold.
The SCORECARD would be self-administered online. Those who score too low to reach the required threshold for designation as a GLOBAL CITIZEN would be directed to instructional materials that would help them to understand what global citizenship requires and what they can do to become a GLOBAL CITIZEN.
On the other hand, for those who score high enough to meet the threshold for GLOBAL CITIZEN, they would be asked to provide their name, country, and email address.
When they do so, they would be directed immediately to a web page that has a printable GLOBAL CITIZEN CERTIFICATE with their name on it. The CERTIFICATE would also bear a unique number, modeled after the U.S. social security numbering system. One of the numbers would designate their country.
These GLOBAL CITIZENS would then have access—using their email address and number—to a network comprised of others who have achieved that designation.
The network is the key. The certification process is designed to recognize those who have the values and perspectives of a GLOBAL CITIZEN but it is the network—the interaction between individuals across the world who share those values and perspectives—where their commitment to global citizenship would be strengthened.
This network of citizens would complement the network of thought leaders that we’ve been building through the Boston Global Forum. Among the resources that would be made available to those in the GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION NETWORK would be those of BGF and UCLA’s Global Citizenship Education Program.
Another component of the proposed program is a leadership initiative. It would be open only to those who are in the GLOBAL CITIZENS NETWORK and would aim to encourage them to take a leadership role in bringing the perspectives and values of global citizenship to others in their community.
Here again, we would have a certification process that would test and recognize leadership. We are thinking of different leadership levels—Bronze, Silver, and Gold—modeled on the format of the Olympics. Demonstrated leadership in global citizenship, and at different levels, would be required for a GLOBAL CITIZEN to receive one of these designations.
And as with the GLOBAL CITIZEN NETWORK, we would create an online network consisting of those at each leadership level. The assumption here is that their leadership will be reinforced and enhanced through contact with those with a similar level of commitment.
So that’s a general outline of the program that we are considering. If you think the program has merit, we will prepare a fuller description of it, including a draft version of the SCORECARD, for our December meeting.
If we were to go ahead with the program, it would take time to develop the software and instructional materials that would be required. Nevertheless, we think the program could be operational sometime in 2017.
For this 2016 Global Cybersecurity Day, our speakers and discussants includes:
Governor Michael Dukakis
Professor Carlos Torres
Nguyen Anh Tuan, Chair
Professor Thomas Patterson
Professor John Savage
Professor David Silbersweig
Professor Nazli Choucri
Allan Cytryn
Llewellyn King
Ryan Maness
Barry Nolan
Apart from these familiar faces, we also welcome some new speakers and discussants to joint this year conference:
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
Ban Ki-moon is the eighth Secretary-General of the United Nations. He was born June 13, 1944 in Eumseong County, South Korea. Ban served his country’s foreign ministry for about three decades; his postings included India, the United States, and Austria. He began his career with the U.N. in 1975, as a member of its South Korean home office. Ban, while South Korea’s ambassador to Austria, was chairman of the preparatory commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization in 1999. Ban was elected secretary-general of the UN in 2006, succeeding Kofi Annan.
Christopher Painter
Mr. Painter has been on the vanguard of cyber issues for over twenty five years. In his current role as the Coordinator for Cyber Issues, Mr. Painter coordinates and leads the United States’ diplomatic efforts to advance an open, interoperable, secure and reliable Internet and information infrastructure. He works closely with components across the Department, other agencies, the White House, the private sector and civil society to implement the U.S. International Strategy for Cyberspace and ensures that U.S. foreign policy positions on cross-cutting cyber issues are fully synchronized.
Prior to joining the State Department, Mr. Painter served in the White House as Senior Director for Cyber Policy and Acting Cyber Coordinator in the National Security Council. During his two years at the White House, Mr. Painter was a senior member of the team that conducted the President’s Cyberspace Policy Review and coordinated the development of the U.S. 2011 International Strategy for Cyberspace.
Caroline Kennedy
Caroline Kennedy is the United States Ambassador to Japan from October 16, 2013. She an attorney and the editor of nine New York Times best-selling books on constitutional law, American history, politics and poetry.
She is Honorary President of the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation and a member of the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award Committee. A graduate of Harvard University and Columbia Law School, she is also Honorary Chair of the Senior Advisory Committee of the Institute of Politics at Harvard University.
From 2002 – 2011, she was Vice Chair of the Fund for Public Schools, which raised over $280 million to support public school reform and engaged a record number of New Yorkers to volunteer in New York City schools.
Kim Taipale
Kim Taipale is the founder and executive director of the Stilwell Center, a private research and advisory organization focused on information, technology and national security policy. He is also the managing partner of Stilwell Holding LLC and a director of the Stilwell Charitable Fund.
Mr. Taipale currently serves on the advisory board of the World Policy Institute and The Common Good, as a member of the Markle Task Force on National Security in the Information Age, and on the board or advisory board of several companies and other non-profit organizations. He was previously a senior fellow at Columbia University, an investment banker at Lazard Freres & Co., and a lawyer at Davis Polk & Wardwell.
Mr. Taipale is a frequent invited speaker, has appeared before U.S. Congressional and other national committees, and is the author of numerous academic papers, journal articles, and book chapters on information, technology, and national security issues.
Mr. Taipale received his B.A. and J.D. from New York University and his M.A., Ed.M., and LL.M. from Columbia University
Sean Kannuck
Sean Kanuck was appointed as the first National Intelligence Officer (NIO) for Cyber Issues in May 2011. The NIO leads the US Intelligence Community (IC) in cyber analysis, directs the production of National Intelligence Estimates, and represents the IC on cyber issues when briefing the White House and testifying before Congress. Kanuck previously served in CIA’s Information Operations Center, as an Intelligence Fellow with the National Security Council, and on the US delegation to the UN Group of Governmental Experts on international information security. He is a professional attorney whose academic publications focus on information warfare and international law. He holds degrees from Harvard (A.B., J.D.), the London School of Economics (M.Sc.), and the University of Oslo (LL.M.)
Professor Seny Kamara
Seny Kamara currently served as Associate Professor of Computer Science at Brown University. From 2008 to 2016, he was a researcher at Microsoft Research (Redmond Lab). His work focuses on designing and analyzing cryptographic algorithms, protocols and systems; often motivated by privacy issues in cloud computing, surveillance and databases.
John Mallery
John Mallery is a research scientist at the MIT Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. He is concerned with cyber policy and has been developing advanced architectural concepts for cyber security and transformational computing for the past decade.Since 2006, he organized a series of national workshops on technical and policy aspects of cyber.
Professor Deborah Hurley
Deborah Hurley is the Principal of the consulting firm she founded in 1996, which advises governments, international organizations, companies, non-governmental organizations, and foundations on advanced science and technology policy. She is a Fellow of the Institute for Quantitative Social Science at Harvard University and directed the Harvard University Information Infrastructure Project. Hurley is Chair, Board of Directors, Electronic Privacy Information Center, and has served on many other governmental and non-governmental boards and committees, including for the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), U.S. State Department, American Association for the Advancement of Science, and National Academy of Sciences Research Council. She carried out a Fulbright study of intellectual property protection and technology transfer in Korea.
Virgilio Almeida
Virgilio Almeida is currently a Visiting Professor at the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences at Harvard University and a Faculty Associate at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University. He is a full professor of the Computer Science Department at the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Brazil.
He is a former National Secretary for Information Technology Policies of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation of Brazil (2011 to 2015). He was the chair of the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br) and was the chair of NETmundial, Global Multistakeholder Conference on the Future of Internet Governance, that was held in Sao Paulo in 2014.
Andrew Lewman
Andrew Lewman is best know for his work as Chief Executive of the TOR Project, a non-profit technology organization which provides online anonymity software tools used by over 2 million Internet users daily in 200+ countries. His work at TOR on behalf of democracy activists and whistleblowers around the world required him to manage relationships with US Dept of State, US Dept of Defense, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Stanford Research Institute (SRI), Broadcasting Board of Governors, Radio Free Asia, Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA), US National Science Foundation (NSF) among others. He is currently President of Laxdaela Technology. They provide consultation on cyber security to clients that include law enforcement agencies, intelligence agencies, and a variety of Internet intelligence companies.He has worked in Stockholm, Reykjavik, Berlin, Paris, Hong Kong, Manila, and Tokyo.
His is also co-chair of Interpol’s ongoing effort to help develop the next generation of Interpol’s Internet Child Sexual Exploitation Database (ICSE DB).
Professor Richard Rosecrance
Richard Rosecrance is an Adjunct Professor at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, a Research Professor of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles. He was formerly a Professor at the University of California, Berkeley, and the Walter S. Carpenter, Jr., Professor of International and Comparative Politics at Cornell University. He served in the Policy Planning Council of the Department of State. He has written or edited more than a dozen books and many scholarly articles.
Markus Prior
Markus Prior is Associate Professor of Politics and Public Affairs in the Woodrow Wilson School and the Department of Politics at Princeton University.
Prior received his Ph.D. from Stanford`s Department of Communication in 2004. He won the 2008 Emerging Scholar Award from the American Political Science Association’s Elections, Public Opinion, and Voting Behavior Section. Prior is the author of Post-Broadcast Democracy (Cambridge University Press, 2007), which won the 2009 Goldsmith Book Prize, awarded by Harvard`s Joan Shorenstein Center, and the 2010 Doris Graber Award for the “best book on political communication in the last 10 years” given by APSA’s Political Communication Section.
Ban Ki-moon is the eighth Secretary-General of the United Nations. He was born June 13, 1944 in Eumseong County, South Korea. Ban served his country’s foreign ministry for about three decades; his postings included India, the United States, and Austria. He began his career with the U.N. in 1975, as a member of its South Korean home office. Ban, while South Korea’s ambassador to Austria, was chairman of the preparatory commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization in 1999. Ban was elected secretary-general of the UN in 2006, succeeding Kofi Annan.
Business Leader in Cybersecurity
Scott Charney
Scott Charney is Corporate Vice President for Microsoft’s Trustworthy Computing Group, where he helps ensure the company’s products and services comply with security and privacy standards. Charney also leads Microsoft’s engagements with governments, partners and customers on security and privacy issues. Before joining Microsoft in 2002, he led PricewaterhouseCoopers’ Cybercrime Prevention and Response Practice and served as Chief of the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section at the U.S. Department of Justice. He serves on the U.S. President’s National Security and Telecommunications Advisory Committee and was a Co-chair of the Center for Strategic and International Studies nonpartisan Commission on Cybersecurity.
Practitioner in Cybersecurity
Dmitri Alperovitch
Dmitri Alperovitch is the Co-Founder and CTO of CrowdStrike Inc., leading its Intelligence, Technology and CrowdStrike Labs teams. Prior to founding CrowdStrike, Dmitri was a Vice President of Threat Research at McAfee, where he led company’s global Internet threat intelligence analysis and investigations. n 2013, Alperovitch received the prestigious recognition of being selected as MIT Technology Review’s “Young Innovators under 35” (TR35), an award previously won by such technology luminaries as Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Mark Zuckerberg and Jonathan Ive. Alperovitch was named Foreign Policy Magazine’s Leading Global Thinker for 2013, an award shared with Secretary of State John Kerry, Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos. He was the recipient of the prestigious Federal 100 Award for his contributions to the federal information security in 2011 and recognized in 2013 as one Washingtonian’s Tech Titans for his accomplishments in the field of cybersecurity.
“It is with a deep feeling of happiness, pleasure and humility that I receive this Honorary Doctorate from this exalted place of study,” said Torres at a ceremony which took place in Lisbon in October in honor of himself and fellow recipient António Manuel Sampaio da Nóvoa of the University of Lisbon. “As professors, we express deep beliefs we have come to in the process of research and theoretical reflection. Ours is an existential dialogue involving theory, investigation, and praxis that makes the experience and meaning of disciplinary practice a quasi sacred act; an act of respect for the truth, even if truth is always a social construct. Thus, as professors, we are cultural workers and, because all narratives are culturally constructed, we need to question them.”
