COMPARISON OF CYBER SECURITY POLICIES OF TÜRKİYE AND ENGLAND
Keywords:
Cyber Space, Cyber Security, Cyber Security Policies, Cyber Security IndicesAbstract
This study evaluates and presents a comparative analysis of all political, strategic, educational, legal, economic, social and organizational aspects of Türkiye and England, which implement cyber security policies. In this study, the analysis of cyber security strategies followed by Türkiye and England has been tried to be revealed. In this study, it is seen that cultural differences play an important role in the cyber field of developed states like England and developing states like Türkiye. Cyber security policies implemented in Türkiye and England adopt a more flexible approach. As a result of this research, it has been seen that these two countries attach importance to their economic and individual dimensions.
The study firstly claims that it is possible to analyze cyber security policies in five dimensions comparatively according to the Global Cyber Security Index (GCI) data and that cyber policies interact at an international level. Cyber security policies include important strategic issues related to security. Secondly, it shows how Türkiye and England design and implement their national cyber security policies, how they approach counter-strategies, and how they respond to increasing threats in the cyber space. In this context, thirdly, by comparing these two countries within various cyber security indices, it is discussed how the best cyber policies can be for countries in the cyber field. Finally, suggestions are made to guide future research on this subject.
References
“2010 to 2015 Government Policy: Cyber Security”,
AFAD (2014). 2014-2023 Kritik Altyapıların Korunması Yol Haritası Belgesi, Ankara: T.C. Başbakanlık
Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı.
“Audit and Risk Committee Minutes” (11.2020), [https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/minutes-cps-audit-and-risk-committee/arc-minutes-october-2020].
Burlu, Kâmil (et al.) Certified Ethical Hacker, [http://www.CEHTurkiye.com].
Cabinet Office (2010). Strategic Framework and Policy Statement on Improving the Resilience of
Critical Infrastructure to Disruption from Natural Hazards, [http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/].
Cabinet Office (2011) The UK Cyber Security Strategy: Protecting and Promoting the UK in a Digital
World, [https://www.gov.uk/government/].
Cabinet Office (2022). Government Cyber Security Strategy: Building a Cyber Resilient Public Sector
-2030.
“Computer Misuse Act 1990”, [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/contents].
CPNI (2020). “Center for the Protection of National Infrastructure”.
Cumhurbaşkanlığı Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı, Orta Vadeli Program (2012- 2014),
[https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Orta_Vadeli_Program2012-2014.pdf].
“Cyber Champions”, [https://www.cyberchampions.org/].
“Cybersecurity Challenge UK”, [https://cybersecuritychallenge.org.uk/].
Çiftçi, Hasan (2019). Technology Foresight and Modeling: Turkish Cybersecurity Foresight 2040, PhD
Thesis, Ankara: METU.
“Data Protection Act 1998”, [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/contents].
Dokuzuncu Kalkınma Planı (2007- 2013). [https://www.sbb.gov.tr/kalkinma-planlari/].
“E-dönüşüm Türkiye”, [http://www.bilgitoplumu.gov.tr/bilgi-toplumu/e-donusum-projesi/].
“Elektronik Apostil Sistemi” (2018).
[https://www.ptt.gov.tr/Sayfalar/Kurumsal/DuyuruDetay.aspx?DetayId=26]
England (2016-2021). “UK National Cyber Security Strategy”.
Erik Silfversten (vd.) (2020). “Cybersecurity A State-of-the-art Review: Phase 2”, Final Report, UK:
RAND Europe.
“EU Cybersecurity Dashboard A Path to a Secure European Cyberspace” (2015),
[https://cybersecurity.bsa.org/].
International Telecommunication Union (2008). “Series X: Data Networks, Open System
Communications and Security, Overview of Cybersecurity”, ITU-T Recommendation, 10 (1).
ISC Turkey, [http://iscturkey.org/].
ITU (2018). Global Cybersecurity Index.
ITU (2020). Global Cybersecurity Index.
Karabacak, Bilge ve Sevgi Özkan (2009). “Critical Infrastructure Protection Status and Action Items of
Turkey”, International Conference on E-Government Sharing Experiences,
[https://fuse.franklin.edu/facstaff-pub/40/].
Mali, Prashant (2016). “Critical Analysis of National Cyber Security Policies of UK, India,
USA&Germany”, Chevening Fellowship in Cybersecurity Project, pp. 1-19.
Maria Bada (ed.) (2016). Cybersecurity Capacity Review of the United Kingdom, Oxford: Oxford
University.
National Crime Agency (NCA), (2017). Annual Report and Accounts 2016–17, London: OGL,
[https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/].
NCSC (04.2021). “Cyber Essentials: Requirements for IT Infrastructure”, UK: Cyber Essentials, pp. 1-
Official Gazette, “5809 Sayılı Elektronik Haberleşme Kanunu”,
[https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2008/11/20081110M1-3.htm].
Official Gazette (20.10.2012). “Ulusal Siber Güvenlik Çalışmalarının Yürütülmesi, Yönetilmesi ve
Koordinasyonuna İlişkin Karar”, Decision No. 2012/3842, issue 28447,
[https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2012/10/20121020-18.htm].
Official Gazette, Decision 2007/12300, [https://resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2007/06/20070621-2.htm].
Official Gazette (6 Mart 2015). “2015-2018 Bilgi Toplumu Stratejisi ve Eylem Planı”, Decision No
/4.
Salih Bıçakçı, D. Ergun ve M. Çelikpala (2016). “Türkiye’de Siber Güvenlik”, (ed. Sinan Ülgen),
Türkiye’de Siber Güvenlik ve Nükleer Enerji, İstanbul: EDAM.
Schmidt, John Michael (2015). “Policy, Planning, Intelligence and Foresight in Government
Organizations”, Foresight, 17(5), pp. 489-511.
SPO Information Society Strategy Action Plan (2006-2010). Assessment Report, No 5, Ankara.
T.C. Adalet Bakanlığı (Nisan 2021). İnsan Hakları Eylem Planı Uygulama Takvimi, s. 54, 60, 104, 106.
TR-BOME KM (Türkiye Bilgisayar Olayları Müdahale Ekibi- Koordinasyon Merkezi), (Ed. Mehmet
Eriş) [http://ulakbim.tubitak.gov.tr] (er. tar. 15.06.2022); H. Şentürk vd. (2012). “Cyber Security…”, s. 118.
Turkish Standards Institute, “ISO/IEC 27001 Personal Data Protection Law & ISO 27701 Personal Data
Management System”, [https://tse.org.tr/IcerikDetay?ID=2311&ParentID=9423].
TÜBİTAK (2004). “National Science and Technology Policies 2003-2023 Strategy Document”.
“Türkiye Siber Güvenlik Kümelenmesi”, [https://www.siberkume.org.tr/Index].
Turkish Penal Code, Protection of Personal Data TCK No. 5237, Articles 135 and 136,
[https://www.kisiselverilerinkorunmasi.org/mevzuat/5237-sayili-turk-ceza-kanunu/].
Ulaşanoğlu, Emin (vd.) (2010). “Bilgi güvenliği: Riskler ve Öneriler”, Bilgi Teknolojileri ve İletişim
Kurumu.
UNGA (2003). “Creation of a Global Culture of Cybersecurity”,
[https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/482184].
UNGA (2018). “Advancing Responsible State Behaviour in Cyberspace in the Context of International
Security”, [https://undocs.org/A/C.1/73/L.37].
United Kingdom Cabinet Office (2009a). Cyber Security Strategy of the United Kingdom: Safety,
Security and Resilience in Cyber space, London: United Kingdom Government.
United Kingdom Cabinet Office (2009b). The National Security Strategy of the United Kingdom:
Update 2009, Security for the Next Generation, London: United Kingdom Government.
United Kingdom Cabinet Office (2011). The UK Cyber Security Strategy: Protecting and Promoting the
UK in a Digital World, London: United Kingdom Government.
Ünver Gül Nazik, (2017). “Ulusal Siber Güvenlik Strateji Belgelerinde İnsan Hakları”, Cyberpolitik
Journal 2 (4), pp. 104-129.
Ünver, Gül Nazik (2018). “Siber Çatışmaların Tanımlanma Sorunu”, Cyberpolitik Journal, 3 (5), 23-44.
Ünver, Gül Nazik (2023). Siber Güvenlik Politikalarının Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analizi: Türkiye ve
İngiltere Örneği, PhD Thesis, Konya: Selcuk University.
WSIS (2005). Report of the Tunis phase of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), Tunis:
WSIS.
Yılmaz, Sacit (2011). “5237 Sayılı Türk Ceza Kanunu’nun 244. Maddesi’nde Düzenlenen Bilişim
Alanındaki Suçlar”, TBB Dergisi, Sayı 92, ss. 62-100.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
