This week's WikiLeaks fiasco has shed light on a number of completely mission critical issues both to business and to government security.
Regardless of your political views on the various wars that the US is engaged in, a large number of the documents that were released so far by WikiLeaks does endanger national security in the US and for our allies abroad. That sounds like a cavalier point, I understand, but there really are substantially greater numbers of lives at risk both now and for decades to come as a result of these 'leaks.'
It is harder to find capable, qualified, and reliable resources for intelligence gathering as a result. This means that our information will consistently be less than optimal and the very reasons that people object to our involvement in Iraq under the suggested purpose of eliminating weapons of mass destruction can only be repeated as we will be in no better position to consider national and global security threats in the future.
It means that in combat our troops will never have enough of the right information to be able to minimize casualties both to our selves and to local civilian populations caught in the conflict.
It means that we will never have enough advance warning to stop critical threats before they reach our borders with weapons and intent to destroy thousands or perhaps even millions.
It will put our front line border guards and troops at increasing risk of lethal violence as it has along the Mexican border and in our camps in Afghanistan.
It means our allies will have less reason to trust our information or our ability to protect their sources when they try to help protect us.
That's what it does to our national security and that of our allies, but what does it mean for our companies?
Julian Assange and his cohorts have already shown us the thin edge of THAT wedge, haven't they?
The message they sent this week was clear - either permit the wanton use of criminally acquired information to continue to threaten the security of millions or suffer the economic consequences of their personal wrath as they tried to take down both Visa and Mastercard. They have then followed up with a series of attacks on companies who do not loudly call for Assange's release.
No company is safe from their blackmail and extortion, just as no government is.
If your company depends on the transaction support of Visa or Mastercard, or any major credit card processing, and they are targeted for attacks by saboteurs, hackers, and cyber-bullies (extortionists), then your company is directly affected by these cyber-terrorists and criminals.
There is a substantial difference between the argument in favour of Free Speech and the action involved in stopping commerce globally and holding every corporation hostage to achieve personal and political gains.
Free Speech has limitations, just as all freedoms do. I have the full freedom to swing my fist anywhere I want - just as long as it doesn't connect with anyone else or anything that doesn't belong to me. Similarly Free Speech is limited - it cannot be used to bully, extort, blackmail, or any of a dozen other verbs.
Businesses and governments need to take extra special precautions and make their systems secure so that only those who critically need sensitive information are given access to it, and that any sharing of that information beyond where it is permitted to go is punished immediately and to the maximum extent of the law as a minimum deterrent to this kind of behaviour.
That's not to say that these kinds of regulations should be used at whim in order to silence legitimate whistle-blowing on criminal behaviours by those in commercial or bureaucratic authority. Revealing criminal behaviour is a fundamental responsibility of individuals to society and those who have the courage to do so should be heralded. The difference? They had better be right, it had better be criminal, and it had better be worth it, or the damage they inflict to their colleagues, their clients, their shareholders, their fellow citizens and the public in general is far too severe to allow those who simply wish to garner attention, glory and power by selling illegally obtained secrets for fame.
Money doesn't have to be the prime motivator - it's not necessarily the currency du jour in these kinds of exchanges. The acclaim and satisfaction gained by outing sensitive secrets is often all that those who have given groups like WikiLeaks seek. For that brief moment they had their "Gotcha!" moment. For that brief moment they achieved a sense of glory in having socked it to 'The Man.' And for months and years to come, everyone else involved in that arena pays the price, some of them the ultimate price; there will invariably be those who pay with their lives.
As managers, entrepreneurs, investors and executives, we need to stop this pretense of 'open-source management.' Open-Source effectively means, 'open season' as soon as any disgruntled or immature employee, or unhappy customer decides to go hunting. Some times it is not even them - it may be their friends, their spouse, their family, their spiteful ex; the list is limitless.
And now with the excuses wiped away through the power play by Julian Assange and his WikiLeaks followers, businesses, not just government, can no longer hide behind the shield of excuses as to why they don't have to implement a serious secrecy policy and strategy to keep their information, their clients' information, their suppliers' information, and their employees' information secure.
The 'What are the odds' Greek Chorus will be the ones suffering the tragedy while the rest of us avoid it by taking action today to protect what's important.
Secrecy is no longer a word of convenience in business. For serious business people, it's a word of bond in a world of acute risk and chronic danger.
