IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/trosos/v17y2023i2d10.1007_s12626-023-00139-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Review and Comparison of US, EU, and UK Regulations on Cyber Risk/Security of the Current Blockchain Technologies: Viewpoint from 2023

Author

Listed:
  • Petar Radanliev

    (University of Oxford)

Abstract

The first cryptocurrency was invented in 2008/09, but the Blockchain-Web3 concept is still in its infancy, and the cyber risk is constantly changing. Cybersecurity should also be adapting to these changes to ensure security of personal data and continuation of operations. This article starts with a comparison of existing cybersecurity standards and regulations from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO)—ISO27001, followed by a discussion on more specific and recent standards and regulations, such as the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA), Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures and the International Organisation of Securities Commissions (CPMI-IOSCO), and more general cryptography (and post-quantum cryptography), in the context of cybersecurity. These topics are followed up by a review of recent technical reports on cyber risk/security and a discussion on cloud security questions. Comparison of Blockchain cyber risk is also performed on the recent EU standards on cyber security, including European Cybersecurity Certification Scheme (EUCS)—cloud, and US standards—The National Vulnerability Database (NVD) Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS). The study includes a review of Blockchain endpoint security, and new technologies e.g., IoT. The research methodology applied is a review and case study analysing secondary data on cybersecurity. The research significance is the integration of knowledge from the United States (US), the European Union (EU), the United Kingdom (UK), and international standards and frameworks on cybersecurity that can be alighted to new Blockchain projects. The results show that cybersecurity standards are not designed in close cooperation between the two major western blocks: US and EU. In addition, while the US is still leading in this area, the security standards for cryptocurrencies, internet-of-things, and blockchain technologies have not evolved as fast as the technologies have. The key finding from this study is that although the crypto-market has grown into a multi-trillion industry, the crypto-market has also lost over 70% since its peak, causing significant financial loss for individuals and cooperation’s. Despite this significant impact to individuals and society, cybersecurity standards and financial governance regulations are still in their infancy, specifically in the UK.

Suggested Citation

  • Petar Radanliev, 2023. "Review and Comparison of US, EU, and UK Regulations on Cyber Risk/Security of the Current Blockchain Technologies: Viewpoint from 2023," The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 105-129, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:trosos:v:17:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s12626-023-00139-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s12626-023-00139-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12626-023-00139-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12626-023-00139-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. S. Creese & W. H. Dutton & P. Esteve-González & R. Shillair, 2021. "Cybersecurity capacity-building: cross-national benefits and international divides," Journal of Cyber Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 214-235, May.
    2. Gregory Falco & Alicia Noriega & Lawrence Susskind, 2019. "Cyber negotiation: a cyber risk management approach to defend urban critical infrastructure from cyberattacks," Journal of Cyber Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 90-116, January.
    3. Katya Delak & Tarik Hansen, 2022. "Security Considerations for a Central Bank Digital Currency," FEDS Notes 2022-02-03-1, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    4. Mr. Ashraf Khan & Majid Malaika, 2021. "Central Bank Risk Management, Fintech, and Cybersecurity," IMF Working Papers 2021/105, International Monetary Fund.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Petar, Radanliev, 2023. "Review and comparison of US, EU, and UK regulations on cyber risk/security of the current Blockchain Technologies - viewpoint from 2023," MPRA Paper 116885, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2023.
    2. Yelena Popova & Olegs Cernisevs, 2022. "Smart City: Sharing of Financial Services," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Wang, Xiaoting & Hou, Siyuan & Kyaw, Khine & Xue, Xupeng & Liu, Xueqin, 2023. "Exploring the determinants of Fintech Credit: A comprehensive analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    4. Wang, Haijun & Mao, Kunyuan & Wu, Wanting & Luo, Haohan, 2023. "Fintech inputs, non-performing loans risk reduction and bank performance improvement," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    5. Milena Vučinić & Radoica Luburić, 2022. "Fintech, Risk-Based Thinking and Cyber Risk," Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice, Central bank of Montenegro, vol. 11(2), pages 27-53.
    6. Savelli, Iacopo & Hepburn, Cameron & Morstyn, Thomas, 2024. "A blueprint for energy systems in the era of central bank digital currencies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    7. Wade, Megan, 2021. "Digital hostages: Leveraging ransomware attacks in cyberspace," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(6), pages 787-797.
    8. Ming Pang & Yao Liu & Sha Wu & Hui Wang, 2023. "Internet Finance and Risk-Taking of City Commercial Banks: Evidence From China," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    9. Petar, Radanliev, 2023. "The Rise and Fall of Cryptocurrencies: Defining the Economic and Social Values of Blockchain Technologies, assessing the Opportunities, and defining the Financial and Cybersecurity Risks of the Metave," MPRA Paper 118249, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Van Roosebeke, Bert & Defina, Ryan, 2022. "Central Bank Digital Currencies: A Review of Operating Models and Design Issues," MPRA Paper 116240, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Petar Radanliev, 2024. "The rise and fall of cryptocurrencies: defining the economic and social values of blockchain technologies, assessing the opportunities, and defining the financial and cybersecurity risks of the Metave," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, December.
    12. Gupta, Somya & Pandey, Dharen Kumar & El Ammari, Anis & Sahu, Ganesh P., 2023. "Do perceived risks and benefits impact trust and willingness to adopt CBDCs?," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    13. Sidney Kawimbe & Mubukwanu Kwalombota, 2024. "Mitigating Cybersecurity Risks in the Digitization of Banking Operations: Strategies, Challenges, and Best Practices for Zambian Commercial Banks," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 8(3s), pages 2988-3005, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:trosos:v:17:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s12626-023-00139-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.