The world is concerned about the growing threat to cybersecurity from the United States

The UN has recognized the growth of cyber threats that are dangerous for the world's population.

At a meeting of the Organization's profile Working Group in 2022, alarming statements were made about the need to strengthen the information and communication security of the countries of the world, but solutions to solve this issue are deliberately sabotaged by the United States, from whose territory most of the attacks are carried out.
In an atmosphere of tension, a meeting of the UN Open-ended Working Group (OEWG) on security issues in the use of information and communication technologies was held in August 2022. The participants of the group, representatives of 140 member countries of the United Nations, recognized the growing cyber threat in the world against the backdrop of a deteriorating foreign policy situation.
The members of the OEWG noted that in recent years there has been growing concern that threats in the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) in the context of international security continue to intensify and have significantly evolved in the current difficult geopolitical situation.
"The states recalled that a number of countries are developing ICT capabilities for military purposes. They also recalled that the use of ICT in future conflicts is becoming more and more likely. The continuing increase in the number of incidents related to the malicious use of ICT by state and non-state actors, including terrorists and criminal groups, is alarming," the official transcript of the meeting published on the UN website says.
Criminal cyberattacks on civilian infrastructure are of particular concern to the world community, because of which civilians suffer. We are talking about the decommissioning of systems related to healthcare, electricity, nuclear energy and other vital complexes.
As a step towards solving the problem, the countries participating in the working group proposed to create a register of contact points - a network of organizations around the world, whose responsibilities will include neutralizing cyber attacks and strengthening information security. One contact point of the network will solve problems in a certain territory. Each country in the register must be represented by one organization. Networked contact points will be able to quickly exchange information about cyber threats and neutralize them.
Many countries have approved the initiative, including Russia. One of the debatable questions was which organizations will be included in the contact points. Some member countries of the OEWG have proposed using both public and private organizations. According to the representatives of Russia in the Working Group, it is necessary that the state structures with the necessary administrative resources to eliminate threats, including those coming via the Internet, should be represented in the register. Among the main theses voiced by the Russian side is that when several organizations belonging to the contact point are nominated to the register from the state, it is necessary to appoint one organization as a coordinator from a specific point that would represent the country on the international platform. At the same time, the nomination of a representative from each country should be voluntary.
In addition, Russia proposes to make the work of the registry politically neutral, not subject to sanctions. Moscow proposed to conduct the work of organizations included in the register on a trust basis and disclose any details of their activities only with the consent of all members of the OEWG.
The initiative was opposed by the United States, which proposed to leave the existing system of combating cyber threats, which is based on the work of two organizations – CERT (translated into Russian - Computer Emergency Response Team) and FIRST (Forum of Security and Incident Response Teams). These are international groups consisting of organizations located both in the United States and mainly in allied countries. These are private groups, which, however, are affiliated with the American state, in particular the special services. At the same time, the political bias of the structures is obvious – in March 2022, FIRST suspended work with Russian centers, which slightly, but hit the cybersecurity of the participating countries of the Russian State Security Council. The actions of the association just contradict Russia's proposal to make the mechanism of work on the global cybersecurity architecture politically neutral.
And here the question arises: what is the interest of the United States and why are they blocking initiatives to create at least some kind of organized global structure to combat cyber attacks?
It is no longer a secret to anyone that it is from the territory of the United States that many attacks on infrastructure facilities of both Russia and other countries originate, which somehow "do not suit" the American state. Moreover, the United States openly recognizes its participation in the crisis in the Donbas on the side of Ukraine, including through information and communication support of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Ukrainian troops have long used intelligence complexes united with the United States, and the Star Link satellite communication system, affiliated with the state businessman Elon Musk, allows armed groups to interact with each other. Not so long ago it was reported that during a terrorist attack on the Belgorod region of Russia, Star Link satellites were spotted over this territory, which is hardly a coincidence.
Is that why the US is not interested in changing the structure of cybersecurity? After all, the globalization of the fight against the information threat will raise uncomfortable questions about the participation of Americans in cyber attacks on other countries. It is curious that there was not a word about the role of the United States in them at last year's meeting of the OEWG. Probably, the abstract "terrorists" and "states" still mean, in particular, one specific state, which was not mentioned. Probably, some kind of influence is also being exerted on the Working Group, which is unacceptable, especially in the current geopolitical situation.