An Axiology of Information Security for Futuristic Neuroprostheses: Upholding Human Values in the Context of Technological Posthumanization
Previous works exploring the challenges of ensuring information security for neuroprosthetic devices and their users have typically built on the traditional InfoSec concept of the “CIA Triad” of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. However, we argue that the CIA Triad provides an increasing...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2017-11-01
|
Series: | Frontiers in Neuroscience |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2017.00605/full |
id |
doaj-e5d57f11fc224760ade1383e6cbc6430 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-e5d57f11fc224760ade1383e6cbc64302020-11-25T02:29:37ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Neuroscience1662-453X2017-11-011110.3389/fnins.2017.00605307712An Axiology of Information Security for Futuristic Neuroprostheses: Upholding Human Values in the Context of Technological PosthumanizationMatthew E. GladdenPrevious works exploring the challenges of ensuring information security for neuroprosthetic devices and their users have typically built on the traditional InfoSec concept of the “CIA Triad” of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. However, we argue that the CIA Triad provides an increasingly inadequate foundation for envisioning information security for neuroprostheses, insofar as it presumes that (1) any computational systems to be secured are merely instruments for expressing their human users' agency, and (2) computing devices are conceptually and practically separable from their users. Drawing on contemporary philosophy of technology and philosophical and critical posthumanist analysis, we contend that futuristic neuroprostheses could conceivably violate these basic InfoSec presumptions, insofar as (1) they may alter or supplant their users' biological agency rather than simply supporting it, and (2) they may structurally and functionally fuse with their users to create qualitatively novel “posthumanized” human-machine systems that cannot be secured as though they were conventional computing devices. Simultaneously, it is noted that many of the goals that have been proposed for future neuroprostheses by InfoSec researchers (e.g., relating to aesthetics, human dignity, authenticity, free will, and cultural sensitivity) fall outside the scope of InfoSec as it has historically been understood and touch on a wide range of ethical, aesthetic, physical, metaphysical, psychological, economic, and social values. We suggest that the field of axiology can provide useful frameworks for more effectively identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing such diverse types of values and goods that can (and should) be pursued through InfoSec practices for futuristic neuroprostheses.http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2017.00605/fullinformation securityCIA triadneuroprostheseshuman-computer interactiontechnological posthumanizationphilosophy of technology |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Matthew E. Gladden |
spellingShingle |
Matthew E. Gladden An Axiology of Information Security for Futuristic Neuroprostheses: Upholding Human Values in the Context of Technological Posthumanization Frontiers in Neuroscience information security CIA triad neuroprostheses human-computer interaction technological posthumanization philosophy of technology |
author_facet |
Matthew E. Gladden |
author_sort |
Matthew E. Gladden |
title |
An Axiology of Information Security for Futuristic Neuroprostheses: Upholding Human Values in the Context of Technological Posthumanization |
title_short |
An Axiology of Information Security for Futuristic Neuroprostheses: Upholding Human Values in the Context of Technological Posthumanization |
title_full |
An Axiology of Information Security for Futuristic Neuroprostheses: Upholding Human Values in the Context of Technological Posthumanization |
title_fullStr |
An Axiology of Information Security for Futuristic Neuroprostheses: Upholding Human Values in the Context of Technological Posthumanization |
title_full_unstemmed |
An Axiology of Information Security for Futuristic Neuroprostheses: Upholding Human Values in the Context of Technological Posthumanization |
title_sort |
axiology of information security for futuristic neuroprostheses: upholding human values in the context of technological posthumanization |
publisher |
Frontiers Media S.A. |
series |
Frontiers in Neuroscience |
issn |
1662-453X |
publishDate |
2017-11-01 |
description |
Previous works exploring the challenges of ensuring information security for neuroprosthetic devices and their users have typically built on the traditional InfoSec concept of the “CIA Triad” of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. However, we argue that the CIA Triad provides an increasingly inadequate foundation for envisioning information security for neuroprostheses, insofar as it presumes that (1) any computational systems to be secured are merely instruments for expressing their human users' agency, and (2) computing devices are conceptually and practically separable from their users. Drawing on contemporary philosophy of technology and philosophical and critical posthumanist analysis, we contend that futuristic neuroprostheses could conceivably violate these basic InfoSec presumptions, insofar as (1) they may alter or supplant their users' biological agency rather than simply supporting it, and (2) they may structurally and functionally fuse with their users to create qualitatively novel “posthumanized” human-machine systems that cannot be secured as though they were conventional computing devices. Simultaneously, it is noted that many of the goals that have been proposed for future neuroprostheses by InfoSec researchers (e.g., relating to aesthetics, human dignity, authenticity, free will, and cultural sensitivity) fall outside the scope of InfoSec as it has historically been understood and touch on a wide range of ethical, aesthetic, physical, metaphysical, psychological, economic, and social values. We suggest that the field of axiology can provide useful frameworks for more effectively identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing such diverse types of values and goods that can (and should) be pursued through InfoSec practices for futuristic neuroprostheses. |
topic |
information security CIA triad neuroprostheses human-computer interaction technological posthumanization philosophy of technology |
url |
http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2017.00605/full |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT matthewegladden anaxiologyofinformationsecurityforfuturisticneuroprosthesesupholdinghumanvaluesinthecontextoftechnologicalposthumanization AT matthewegladden axiologyofinformationsecurityforfuturisticneuroprosthesesupholdinghumanvaluesinthecontextoftechnologicalposthumanization |
_version_ |
1724831929972293632 |