Scholarlink

<p>Introduction of neurotechnology into cybersecurity systems is a&#xa0;paradigm shift in digital security, which brings in the most challenging ethical, legal, and sociopolitical issues. The paper critically addresses the interface between computer and neural implants, and cognitive enhancement technology and modern cybersecurity architectures in authentication, threat detection, and system integrity applications along with presenting an interdisciplinary analysis of the core shortcomings of available regulatory frameworks, namely, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime. The discussion indicates that existing technology-agnostic means of dealing with neural data are insufficient to meet its peculiarities such as the lack of reversibility, continuous nature, involuntary nature, cognitive closeness, and constitutive connection to individual identity. The paper emphasis on the notion of cognitive sovereignty to be used as a&#xa0;legal principle in the governance of neurotechnology, which is the synthesis of informational self-determination doctrines, bodily integrity, and freedom of thought. The framework considers socio-political consequences such as the creation of a&#xa0;cognitive gap, in which disparities in access to neuro-security technologies contribute to the further amplification of existing digital disparities, and evaluates the issues of legitimacy in respect of state-sponsored neural surveillance along certain regulatory reforms such as neural data should be recognized as a&#xa0;separate category of data that necessitates particular protection and the essential equivalence condition necessary to establish the basic nature of consent, should be enacted, neural interface should be designed under the relevant cybersecurity standards, extensive liability regimes should be developed, with reference to these recommendations, the paper seeks to strike a&#xa0;balance between the demands of innovation and the most basic of rights protection so that neurotechnology should be viewed as a&#xa0;tool of human empowerment, and not exploitation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Ethical and legal dimensions of integrating neurotechnology with cybersecurity, a critical reflection for information and communication technology (ICT) policy and practice

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月22日

查看全文
  • Ms. Kritika

摘要

Introduction of neurotechnology into cybersecurity systems is a paradigm shift in digital security, which brings in the most challenging ethical, legal, and sociopolitical issues. The paper critically addresses the interface between computer and neural implants, and cognitive enhancement technology and modern cybersecurity architectures in authentication, threat detection, and system integrity applications along with presenting an interdisciplinary analysis of the core shortcomings of available regulatory frameworks, namely, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime. The discussion indicates that existing technology-agnostic means of dealing with neural data are insufficient to meet its peculiarities such as the lack of reversibility, continuous nature, involuntary nature, cognitive closeness, and constitutive connection to individual identity. The paper emphasis on the notion of cognitive sovereignty to be used as a legal principle in the governance of neurotechnology, which is the synthesis of informational self-determination doctrines, bodily integrity, and freedom of thought. The framework considers socio-political consequences such as the creation of a cognitive gap, in which disparities in access to neuro-security technologies contribute to the further amplification of existing digital disparities, and evaluates the issues of legitimacy in respect of state-sponsored neural surveillance along certain regulatory reforms such as neural data should be recognized as a separate category of data that necessitates particular protection and the essential equivalence condition necessary to establish the basic nature of consent, should be enacted, neural interface should be designed under the relevant cybersecurity standards, extensive liability regimes should be developed, with reference to these recommendations, the paper seeks to strike a balance between the demands of innovation and the most basic of rights protection so that neurotechnology should be viewed as a tool of human empowerment, and not exploitation.