Birleşmiş Milletler Sistemi ve Küresel Siberalan Güvenliği Regülasyonu

Abstract

Daha yakın zamana kadar büyük ölçüde bilgisayar sistemlerinin teknik korumasıyla ilişkilendirilen siber güvenlik, son beş yılda önemli ekonomik, insani ve ulusal güvenlik riskleri doğuran geleneksel olmayan bir güvenlik sorun olarak küresel toplumun gündemini sıklıkla meşgul etmektedir. Evrensel üyeliğe sahip ve egemen eşitlik ilkesi tarafından yönlendirilen Birleşmiş Milletler (BM), ulusal ve uluslararası siberalan güvenliği tartışmalarının yapıldığı önemli küresel hükümetlerarası örgütlerden biridir. Siber güçlerin siber normları kendi gündemleri çerçevesinde şekillendirmede etkin bir örgütsel platform ve araç olarak kullandıkları BM Genel Kurulu’nda siber güvenliğin siyasi, askeri, mali ve insani boyutlarıyla ilgili yürütülen müzakereleri ve kararları inceleyen bu makale, bir yandan siber güvenlik konusunda uluslararası toplumda oluşan fay hatlarını ortaya koymakta, diğer yandan birçok farklı hükümetlerarası organ ve örgütsel platformda ele alındığı için oldukça parçalanmış nitelikte olan BM’nin siberalan güvenliği regülasyonu hakkında tematik ve bütüncül bir analiz sunmaktadır. Makale, siber güçler arasında uluslararası siber güvenlik rejiminin niteliğine yönelik normatif çatışmayı, devletlerin siberalanda artan gücünü ve etkisini ve küresel yönetişimde Batı’dan Doğu’ya doğru bir kaymayı içeren üç ana eğilimin siberalanı şekillendirdiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Ayrıca çalışma kapsamında, devletler arasında siberalandaki faaliyetleri düzenlemek için harekete geçme iradesinde fark edilebilir bir ivme göze çarpsa da ortaya çıkan düzenleyici çerçevenin odağı ve siberalanı yönetmeye yönelik temel yaklaşımla ilgili olarak uluslararası toplumda net bir ayrımın devam ettiği ve siberalanın 21. yüzyılın merkezi bir jeopolitik rekabet alanı olarak ortaya çıktığı sonucuna varılmaktadır.

Keywords

• Uluslararası Siyaset
• Uluslararası Örgütler
• Birleşmiş Milletler
• Uluslararası Siber Güvenlik
• Uluslararası Güvenlik
• Geleneksel Olmayan Güvenlik Tehditleri
• Küresel Yönetişim

The United Nations System and the Regulation of Global Cyberspace Security

Abstract

Cybersecurity, which was until recently largely associated with the technical protection of computer systems, has in the last five years risen on the global community’s agenda as an important non- traditional security issue posing significant economic, humanitarian, and national security risks. The United Nations (UN), with its universal membership and guided by the sovereign equality principle, has emerged as one of the first important global intergovernmental organizations for international cybersecurity debates. However, its regulation of cybersecurity, covering all aspects of protection from risks arising from the use of cyberspace by citizens, businesses, and governments, is highly fragmented as it is implemented by many different intergovernmental bodies and organizational platforms. In this article, I examine UN resolutions on the political, military, economic, and humanitarian aspects of cybersecurity to provide a thematic and holistic analysis of UN’s activities regarding cybersecurity. I also reveal the fault lines in the international community on cybersecurity by examining debates in the UN General Assembly and other organizational platforms, which cyber powers use both as a forum and resource to shape the global cyber norms agenda. My analysis shows that three main trends shape cyberspace regulation at the UN: a normative conflict between cyber powers over the nature of the international cybersecurity regime; the increasing power and influence of states in cyberspace; and a shift from West to East in global cyberspace governance. While states are clearly willing to regulate activities in cyberspace, the article also reveals a clear divide within the international community regarding the focus of the emerging regulatory framework and the basic approach to managing cyberspace. I conclude that cyberspace is likely to remain a central area of geopolitical competition in the 21st century.

Keywords

• International Politics
• International Organizations
• United Nations
• International Cybersecurity
• International Security
• Non-Traditional Security Threats
• Global Governance

References

1. ABD Ordusu Ortak Yayını JP 3-12 (2018). US Army Joint Publication JP 3-12 Cyberspace Operations, (CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, June 2018)  https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/jp3_12.pdf > (Erişim Tarihi: 10 Ocak 2021)
2. Afrika Birliği (2014). African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection, June 27, 2014,  https://au.int/en/treaties/african-union-convention-cyber-security-and-personal-data-protection (Erişim Tarihi: 10 Ocak 2021)
3. ASEAN (2017). Preserving and Enhancing International Cyber Stability: Regional Realities and Approaches in ASEAN Report of the 2nd International Security Cyber Workshop Series, September 20-21, 2017,  https://unidir.org/files/publications/pdfs/preserving-and-enhancing-international-cyber-stability-regional-realities-and-approaches-in-asean-en-778.pdf  (Erişim Tarihi: 9 Ocak 2020)
4. Association for Progressive Communications (APC) (2019). Open Letter to UN General Assembly: Proposed International Convention on Cybercrime Poses a Threat to Human Rights Online, November 6, 2019, https://www.apc.org/en/pubs/open-letter-un-general-assembly-proposed-international-convention-cybercrime-poses-threat-human (Erişim Tarihi: 1 Şubat 2021)
5. Avrupa Birliği (2019). Regulation (EU) 2019/881 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on ENISA (the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity) and on Information and Communications Technology Cybersecurity Certification and Repealing Regulation (EU) No 526/2013 (Cybersecurity Act) PE/86/2018/REV/1, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/881/oj (Erişim Tarihi: 1 Şubat 2021)
6. Avrupa Konseyi (2001). Convention on Cybercrime, 23 November 2001,  https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/treaty/185  (Erişim Tarihi 7 Temmuz 2020)
7. BRICS (2017). BRICS Leaders Xiamen Declaration, 5 September 2017, http://www.bricschn.org/English/2017-09/05/c_136583711_2.htm (Erişim Tarihi: 1 Şubat 2021)
8. Brown D. (2019). UN General Assembly Adopts Record Number of Resolutions on Internet Governance And Policy: Mixed Outcomes For Human Rights Online, APC, (10 January) https://www.apc.org/en/news/un-general-assembly-adopts-record-number-resolutions-internet-governance-and-policy-mixed  (Erişim Tarihi: 9 Eylül 2020)

9. Budnitsky, S. ve Jia, L. (2018). Branding Internet Sovereignty: Digital Media and the Chinese–Russian Cyber Alliance, European Journal of Cultural Studies, 21(5), 594– 613. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549417751151
10. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) (2018). Economic Impact of Cybercrime: No Slowing Down, https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/economic-impact-cybercrime.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 9 Ağustos 2020)
11. Choucri N. (2012). Cyberpolitics in International Relations, The MIT Press.
12. Cybersecurity Ventures (2020). Official Annual Cybercrime Report, https://cybersecurityventures.com/annual-cybercrime-report-2020/
13. Deibert R. J. ve Rohozinski R. (2010). Risking Security: Policies and Paradoxes of Cyberspace Security, International Political Sociology 4 (1) 15–32.
14. Deibert, R. J., Rohozinski R. ve Crete-Nishihata M. (2012). Cyclones in Cyberspace: Information Shaping and Denial in the 2008 Russia–Georgia War, Security Dialogue 43 (1) 3–24.
15. Deibert R. J. ve Crete-Nishihata M. (2012). Global Governance and the Spread of Cyberspace Controls, Global Governance 18, 339-361.
16. Deibert R. (2015). The Geopolitics of Cyberspace after Snowden, Current History 114 (768) 9-15.
17. Detsch, J. (2018). How Russia and Others Use Cybercriminals as Proxies, The Christian Science Monitor, (28 June), https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2017/0628/How-Russia-and-others-use-cybercriminals-as-proxies
18. Feick, J. ve Werle, R. (2010). Regulation of Cyberspace. In R. Baldwin, M. Cave, & M. Lodge (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Regulation (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 523-547, doi.org/10.1093/ oxfordhb/9780199560219.003. 0021.
19. Finnemore M. ve Hollis D B. (2016). Constructing Norms for Global Cybersecurity, The American Journal of International Law 110 (3) 425- 479.
20. G20 (2015). ‘Leaders' Communiqué Antalya Summit’ (2015) November 15-16  http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/2015/151116-communique.html > (Erişim Tarihi: 8 Eylül 2020)
21. G7 (2016). Principles and Actions on Cyber’ (2016)  https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000160279.pdf > (Erişim Tarihi: 8 Eylül 2020)
22. G8 (2003). Principles for Protecting Critical Information Infrastructures, http://www.cybersecuritycooperation.org/documents/G8_CIIP_Principles.pd (Erişim Tarihi: 1 Şubat 2021)
23. GCSC (The Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace) (2018). ‘Norm Package Singapore’, (2018) Kasım  https://cyberstability.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/GCSC-Singapore-Norm-Package-3MB.pdf > (Erişim Tarihi: 5 Ocak 2020)
24. GCSC (The Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace) (2019). ‘Advancing Cyberstability Final Report’ (2019) Kasım  https://cyberstability.org/report/#6-norms > (Erişim Tarihi: 10 Ocak 2020)
25. Grigsby, A. (2017). The End of Cyber Norms, Survival 59 (6) 109-122, DOI: 10.1080/00396338.2017.1399730
26. Hakman, J. (2017). Building a Stronger İnternational Legal Framework on Cybercrime, Chatham House, 6 June 2017, https://www.chathamhouse.org/expert/comment/building-stronger-international-legal-framework-cybercrime (Erişim Tarihi: 10 Ocak 2021)
27. Henderson C. (2015). The United Nations and the Regulation of Cybersecurity, Içinde Nicholas Tsagourias ve Russell Buchan, (der.), International Law and Cyberspace. Research Handbooks in International Law, (Edward Elgar) 465-490.
28. ISO/IEC 27032:2012 (2012). Information Technology — Security Techniques — Guidelines for Cybersecurity  https://www.iso.org/standard/44375.html  (Erişim Tarihi: 7 Şubat 2021)
29. ITU (2008). X.1205: Overview of Cybersecurity, https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.1205-200804-I (Erişim Tarihi: 5 Ocak 2021)
30. Kavanagh C. (2017). The United Nations, Cyberspace and International Peace and Security: Responding to Complexity in the 21st Century, UNIDIR,  https://www.unidir.org/files/publications/pdfs/the-united-nations-cyberspace-and-international-peace-and-security-en-691.pdf  (Erişim Tarihi: 1 Eylül 2020)
31. Kerr, J. A. (2018). Information, Security, and Authoritarian Stability: Internet Policy Diffusion and Coordination in the Former Soviet Region, International Journal of Communication 12, 3814–3834, DOI: 1932–8036/20180005
32. Maréchal, N. (2017). Networked Authoritarianism and the Geopolitics of Information: Understanding Russian Internet Policy, Media and Communication, 5 (1): 29–41 DOI: 10.17645/mac.v5i1.808
33. Maurer T. (2011). Cyber Norm Emergence at the United Nations, – An Analysis of the UN‘s Activities Regarding Cyber-security (2011), Belfer Center Discussion Paper #2011-11,  https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/files/publication/maurer-cyber-norm-dp-2011-11-final.pdf > (Erişim Tarihi :8 Ağustos 2020).
34. Maurer T. (2019). A Dose of Realism: The Contestation and Politics of Cyber Norms, Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 1-23.
35. McKune, S. ve Ahmed, S. (2018). The Contestation and Shaping of Cyber Norms through China’s Internet Sovereignty Agenda, International Journal of Communication 12, 3835–3855.
36. Microsoft (2020). Cyberattacks Targeting Health Care Must Stop, Nov 13, https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2020/11/13/health-care-cyberattacks-covid-19-paris-peace-forum/ (Erişim Tarihi: 10 Ocak 2021)
37. Mueller M. L. (2010). Networks and States: The Global Politics of Internet Governance, MIT Press.
38. Nocetti, J. (2015). Contest and Conquest: Russia and Global İnternet Governance. International Affairs, 91: 111-130, doi:10.1111/1468-2346.12189
39. Nye, J. S. (2014). The Regime Complex for Managing Global Cyber Activities. Global Commission on Internet Governance Paper Series, https://www.cigionline.org/publications/regime-complex-managing-global-cyber-activities
40. OAS (2004). Resolution AG / RES. 2004 (XXXIV-O/04), titled “The Inter-American Integral Strategy to Combat Threats to Cyber Security,” https://www.oas.org/juridico/english/cyb_pry_strategy.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 10 Haziran 2020)
41. OECD (2002). Guidelines for the Security of Information Systems and Networks Towards a Culture of Security, http://www.oecd.org/sti/ieconomy/15582260.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 10 Kasım 2020)
42. OECD (2008). Recommendation of the Council on the Protection of Critical Information Infrastructures (C(2008)35) [OECD/LEGAL/0361], http://www.oecd.org/sti/40825404.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 10 Kasım 2020)
43. OECD (2019). Recommendation of the Council on Digital Security of Critical Activities, OECD/LEGAL/0456, https://www.oecd.org/sti/ieconomy/recommendation-on-digital-security-of-critical-activities.htm (Erişim Tarihi: 10 Kasım 2020)
44. OSCE (2016a). Permanent Council Decision No. 1202, OSCE Confidence-Building Measures to Reduce the Risks of Conflict Stemming from the use of Information and Communication Technologies, https://www.osce.org/pc/227281?download=true (Erişim Tarihi: 11 Kasım 2020)
45. OSCE (2016b). Ministerial Council Decision No.5/16 - OSCE Efforts Related to Reducing the Risks of Conflict Stemming from the Use of Information and Communication Technologies. https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/2/8/288086.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 11 Kasım 2020)
46. OSCE (2017). Cyber Security for Critical Infrastructure: Strengthening Confidence Building in the OSCE - Conference of the Austrian OSCE Chairmanship 15 February 2017, Vienna, https://www2.osce.org/files/f/documents/5/1/298281.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 11 Kasım 2020)
47. Oxford University (2020a). Oxford Statement on the International Law Protections against Cyber Operations Targeting the Health Care Sector, 21 May 2020, https://www.elac.ox.ac.uk/the-oxford-statement-on-the-international-law-protections-against-cyber-operations-targeting-the-hea (Erişim Tarihi: 11 Ocak 2021)
48. Oxford University (2020b). Second Oxford Statement on International Law Protections of the Healthcare Sector During Covid-19: Safeguarding Vaccine, 7 August 2020, https://www.elac.ox.ac.uk/article/the-second-oxford-statement (Erişim Tarihi: 11 Ocak 2021)
49. Pallin, C.V. (2017). Internet Control through Ownership: The Case of Russia, Post- Soviet Affairs, 33 (1):16-33.
50. Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace (2018, 12 November).  https://www.diplomatie. gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/paris_call_text_-_en_cle06f918.pdf > (Erişim Tarihi: 9 Ocak 2020)
51. Risk Based Security (2020). Data Breach 2020 Q3 Report, https://pages.riskbasedsecurity.com/hubfs/Reports/2020/2020%20Q3%20Data%20Breach%20QuickView%20Report.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 11 Ocak 2021)
52. RiskIQ (2020). The 2020 Evil Internet Minute, https://www.riskiq.com/resources/infographic/evil-internet-minute-2020/ (Erişim Tarihi: 11 Ocak 2021)
53. Ruhl, C., Hollis, D., Hoffman, W. ve Maurer T. (2020). Cyberspace and Geopolitics: Assessing Global Cybersecurity Norm Processes at a Crossroads. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, https://carnegieendowment.org/files/Cyberspace_and_Geopolitics.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 9 Ocak 2021)
54. Rusya Federasyonu (2000). Information Security Doctrine of the Russian Federation  https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Cybersecurity/Documents/National_Strategies_Repository/Russia_2000.pdf > (Erişim Tarihi: 20 Kasım 2019)
55. Safshekan, O. (2017). Iran and the Global Politics of Internet Governance, Journal of Cyber Policy, 2 (2), 266-284, DOI: 10.1080/23738871.2017.1360375
56. Schmitt M. (2017). Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations, 2nd Ed., Cambridge University Press.
57. SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) (2009). Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of International Information Security, (16 June)  https://ccdcoe-admin.aku.co/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/SCO-090616-IISAgreement.pdf > (Erişim Tarihi: 15 Ocak 2020)
58. Security Council Report (SCR) (2016a). Open Arria-Formula Meeting on Counter-Terrorism , (21 November),  https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2016/11/open-arria-formula-meeting-on-counter-terrorism.php (Erişim Tarihi: 20 Eylül 2020)
59. Security Council Report (SCR) (2016b). Open Arria-Formula Meeting on Cyber Security, (28 November),  https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2016/11/open-arria-formula-meeting-on-cybersecurity.php  (Erişim Tarihi: 20 Eylül 2020)
60. Security Council Report (SCR) (2020). Arria-formula Meeting on Cyber-Attacks Against Critical Infrastructure (26 August), https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2020/08/arria formula-meeting-on-cyber-attacks-against-critical-infrastructure.php (Erişim Tarihi: 20 Ocak 2021)
61. Tikk-Ringas, E. (2012). Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunication in the Context of International Security: Work of the UN First Committee 1998-2012, ICT4Peace Publishing,  https://citizenlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/UN-GGE-Brief-2012.pdf  (Erişim Tarihi: 7 Temmuz 2020)
62. UN CTED ve UN OCT (2018). The Protection of Critical Infrastructures Against Terrorist Attacks: Compendium Of Good Practices, https://www.un.org/sc/ctc/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Compendium-CIP-final-version-120618_new_fonts_18_june_2018_optimized.pdf  (Erişim Tarihi: 12 Ekim 2020).
63. UN Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution 20/8 (2012). The Promotion, Protection and Enjoyment of Human Rights on the Internet, (16 July 2012), A/HRC/RES/20/8, https://undocs.org/A/HRC/RES/20/8 
64. UN Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution 26/13 (2014). The Promotion, Protection and Enjoyment of Human Rights on the Internet (26 July 2014), A/HRC/RES/26/13 https://daccess-ods.un.org/TMP/4319375.15735626.html 
65. UN Human Rights Council (HCR) Resolution 28/16 (2015). The right to privacy in the digital age (26 March 2015) A/HRC/RES/28/16,  https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G15/068/78/PDF/G1506878.pdf?OpenElement 
66. UN Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution 32/13 (2016). The Promotion, Protection and Enjoyment of Human Rights on the Internet (1 July 2016), A/HRC/RES/32/13,  https://daccess-ods.un.org/TMP/3695021.56972885.html
67. UN Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution 38/7 (2018). The Promotion, Protection and Enjoyment of Human Rights on the Internet, (5 July 2018), A/HRC/RES/38/7, https://undocs.org/A/HRC/RES/38/7 
68. UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2013). Comprehensive Study on Cybercrime, New York. https://www.unodc.org/documents/organized-crime/UNODC_CCPCJ_EG.4_2013/CYBERCRIME_STUDY_210213.pdf
69. UNGA 65/201 (2010). Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security, Note by the Secretary-General (30 July 2010), A/65/201  https://www.unidir.org/files/medias/pdfs/information-security-2010-doc-2-a-65-201-eng-0-582.pdf>
70. UNGA 66/359 (2011). Letter dated 12 September 2011 from the Permanent Representatives of China, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, A/66/359,  https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/710973>
71. UNGA 68/98 (2013). Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security, Note by the Secretary-General (24 June 2013), A/68/98,  https://www.unidir.org/files/medias/pdfs/developments-in-the-field-of-information-and-telecommunications-in-the-context-of-international-security-2012-2013-a-68-98-eng-0-518.pdf >
72. UNGA 69/273 (2015). Letter dated 9 January 2015 from the Permanent Representatives of China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, U.N. Doc. A/69/273,  http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=A/69/723 >
73. UNGA 70/174 (2015). Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security, Note by the Secretary-General (22 July 2015), A/70/174,  https://undocs.org/A/70/174 >
74. UNGA 72/327 (2017). Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security, Report of the Secretary-General (14 August 2017), A/72/327  https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N17/257/46/PDF/N1725746.pdf?OpenElement >
75. UNGA A/C.3/72/12 (2017). Letter dated 11 October 2017 from the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General , https://undocs.org/A/C.3/72/12
76. UNGA Report 54/213 (1999). Report of the Secretary-General Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security (10 August 1999), A/54/213  https://undocs.org/A/54/213 >
77. UNGA Report 55/593 (2000). Report of the Third Committee 55/593, Crime prevention and criminal justice, (16 November 2000), A/55/593, https://undocs.org/A/55/593 
78. UNGA Report 57/529/Add. 3 (2002). Report of the Second Committee 57/529/Add. 3, Macroeconomic policy questions: science and technology for development, (21 December 2002), A/57/529/Add. 3, https://undocs.org/A/57/529/Add.3 
79. UNGA Report 58/481/Add.2 (2003). Report of the Second Committee 58/481/Add.2, Macroeconomic policy questions: science and technology for development, (15 December 2003), A/58/481/Add.2, https://undocs.org/A/58/481/Add.2 
80. UNGA Report 64/422/Add.3 (2009). Report of the Second Committee 64/422/Add.3, Globalization and interdependence: science and technology for development, (15 December 2009) A/64/422/Add.3, https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/A/64/422/Add.3 
81. UNGA Report 27/37 (2014). Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, (30 June 2014), A/HRC/27/37 https://undocs.org/A/HRC/27/37
82. UNGA Report 39/29 (2018). Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights 39/29, The right to privacy in the digital age, (3 August 2018), A/HRC/39/29,  https://undocs.org/A/HRC/39/29 
83. UNGA Report 74/130 (2019). Report of the Secretary-General 74/130, Countering the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes, (30 July 2019) A/74/130. https://undocs.org/A/74/130 
84. UNGA Resolution 53/70 (1999). Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security, (4 Ocak 1999). A/RES/53/70,  https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/a/res/53/70 >
85. UNGA Resolution 55/63 (2001). [on the report of the Third Committee (A/55/593)], Combating the criminal misuse of information technologies, (22 January 2001) A/RES/55/63. https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/55/63 
86. UNGA Resolution 56/121 (2002). [on the report of the Third Committee (A/56/574)] Combating the criminal misuse of information technologies, (23 January 2002), A/RES/56/121, https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/56/121 
87. UNGA Resolution 56/19 (2001). [on the report of the First Committee (A/56/533)] , Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security, (7 January 2002 ), A/RES/56/19,  https://undocs.org/A/RES/56/19 >
88. UNGA Resolution 57/239 (2002). [on the report of the Second Committee (A/57/529/Add.3)] Creation of a global culture of cybersecurity, (20 December 2002) A/RES/57/239  https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/57/239 
89. UNGA Resolution 58/199 (2003). [on the report of the Second Committee (A/58/481/Add.2)]. Creation of a global culture of cybersecurity and the protection of critical information infrastructures, (23 December 2003), A/RES/58/199,  https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/58/199 
90. UNGA Resolution 64/211 (2009). [on the report of the Second Committee (A/64/422/Add.3)] Creation of a global culture of cybersecurity and taking stock of national efforts to protect critical information infrastructures, (21 December 2009), A/RES/64/211,  https://undocs.org/A/RES/64/211 
91. UNGA Resolution 65/230 (2010). [on the report of the Third Committee (A/65/457)] Twelfth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (21 December 2010), A/RES/65/230, https://undocs.org/A/Res/65/230 
92. UNGA Resolution 68/167 (2013). [on the report of the Third Committee (A/68/456/Add.2)]. The right to privacy in the digital age, (18 December 2013), A/RES/68/167,  https://undocs.org/A/RES/68/167 
93. UNGA Resolution 69/166 (2014). [on the report of the Third Committee (A/69/488/Add.2 and Corr.1)], The right to privacy in the digital age (18 December 2014) A/RES/69/166.  https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N14/707/03/PDF/N1470703.pdf?OpenElement 
94. UNGA Resolution A/C.3/73/L.9/Rev.1 (2018). Countering the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes, (2 November 2018),  https://undocs.org/A/C.3/73/L.9/Rev.1 
95. UNGA Resolution 73/179 (2018). [on the report of the Third Committee (A/73/589/Add.2)] The right to privacy in the digital age, (17 December 2018), A / RES / 73/179,  https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/73/179 
96. UNGA Resolution 73/187 (2018). [on the report of the Third Committee (A/73/590)] Countering the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes, (17 December 2018), A/RES/73/187,  https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/73/187 
97. UNGA Resolution 73/266 (2018). [on the report of the First Committee (A/73/505)] Advancing responsible State Behavior in Cyberspace in the Context of International Security, A/RES/73/266,  https://undocs.org/A/RES/73/266 >
98. UNGA Resolution 73/27 (2018). [on the Report of the First Committee (A/73/505)] Developments in the Field of Information And Telecommunications In The Context Of International Security, (11 December 2018), A/RES/73/27 ,  https://undocs.org/A/RES/73/27 >
99. UNGA resolution 74/173 (2019). [on the report of the Third Committee (A/74/400)] Promoting technical assistance and capacity-building to strengthen national measures and international cooperation to combat cybercrime, including information-sharing (18 December 2019) A/RES/74/173 , https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/A/RES/74/173 
100. UNGA Resolution 74/247 (2019). [on the report of the Third Committee (A/74/401)] Countering the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes, ( 27 December 2019), A/RES/74/247  https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N19/440/28/PDF/N1944028.pdf?OpenElement 
101. UNGA Resolution A/C.3/74/L.11/Rev.1 (2019). Countering the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes (5 November 2019)  https://undocs.org/A/C.3/74/L.11/Rev.1 
102. UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2341 (2017) [on threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts], (13 February 2017), S/RES/2341 (2017),  https://undocs.org/S/RES/2341(2017) 
103. Walker, S. (2019). Cyber-Insecurities? A Guide to the UN Cybercrime Debate, Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime, Geneva.  https://globalinitiative.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/TGIATOC-Report-Cybercrime-in-the-UN-01Mar1510-Web.pdf  (Erişim Tarihi: 15 Kasım 2020).
104. WHO (2020). WHO Reports Fivefold İncrease in Cyber Attacks, Urges Vigilance (23 April), https://www.who.int/news/item/23-04-2020-who-reports-fivefold-increase-in-cyber-attacks-urges-vigilance (Erişim Tarihi: 12 Ocak 2021).
105. World Economic Forum (WEF) (2020). The Global Risks Report 2020, Geneva, 2020  http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Global_Risk_Report_2020.pdf  (Erişim Tarihi: 1 Ağustos 2020)