Quantum Matters: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Quantum Cybersecurity

With a US inteligence report confirming that President Putin authorised a pro-Trump influence campaign in the latest election, China and the US in a stand-off, and the recklessness of ransomware groups tolerated, and at times abetted, by state actors, geographical risk is at its highest in a long time. See my latest column in The Quantum Daily on how we are skirting the edge. And what steps can be taken to mitigate risk.

An assassination in Sarajevo. The subsequent chain of events ultimately leads to a world war. An estimated 20 million people die.

A small US bank succumbs to a cyberattack. Amidst carefully placed misinformation campaigns, bank runs and riots, the repercussions start to drag down the financial system. The US blames Russia, calls on NATO under Article 5, where an attack on one is an attack on all, and step-by-step the world explodes into the Third World War.

What unifies these two scenarios is that we are living in an era reminiscent of pre-World War I: the seeds of conflict are sown, irrigated by mistrust, and one spark can start a wildfire.

Last month at their Geneva summit Joe Biden made clear to Vladimir Putin where the US red lines in cybersecurity lie. “Certain critical infrastructure should be off-limits to attack, period,” said the US President.  One of the 16 sectors mentioned was financial services. It is a given that the message was also aimed at China, Iran and other hostile states with a track record of cyberattacks.

The US government has been in contact with American banks this year to chivy them into increasing their cyber defences, while Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell stated that cyberattacks are the biggest risk to the system. They can trigger a liquidity run and lead to solvency issues.

One of the most worrying possibilities is a supply chain attack. In a little-publicised paper published by the New York Federal Reserve, Cyber Risk and the US Financial System: A Pre-Mortem Analysis, the authors note that an attack on a significant service provider which connects small and medium sized banks has the potential to cause a systemic event. The concentration of banks using the few existing cloud providers, like AWS or Microsoft’s Azure, for instance, is a clear risk.

The authors also note that in a five-day cyber attack, nearly half of US financial institutions would run out of reserves by day five.

The top concern is not so much a provocation, as a misjudgement, ultimately leading to WWIII. Take the recent Colonial Pipeline attack by DarkSide. They planned to attack the business side, not the operational side, which is responsible for transmitting roughly 45% of East Coast fuel. They knew the latter would be perceived as an attack on infrastructure, bringing the might of the US intelligence services down on them for straying into the political arena.

“We are apolitical, we do not participate in geopolitics, do not need to tie us with a defined government and look for our other motives,” they swiftly posted on their Dark Web page, as they sought to excuse their error and distance themselves from suspicions of links to the Russian government.

There is no easy solution to the uncertainty of who is behind a cyber attack, nor to mishaps prevalent in a digital world.

But there is a clear need for key sectors to take a big step up in cybersecurity. Not least with China – which just celebrated the 100th anniversary of the Communist Party amid Taiwan fly-overs – on what looks ever more likely to be a collision course with the West.

Paradoxically, the quantum industry may be the answer to cybersecurity, while also being its biggest threat. The creation of quantum keys which are certifiably random – unlike the current RSA encryption and other standard ones – could provide hacker-free security. At least eleven global banks are exploring quantum safe protocols for security, ranging from JP Morgan to BNP Paribas and RBC of Canada, as reported here by The Quantum Daily (TQD). Around thirty-five quantum companies in countries ranging from Poland to Singapore are working on quantum cybersecurity products.

A handful of years down the line powerful quantum computers may be able to decrypt the data already being harvested by ransomware gangs and hostile nation states – yet another reason to experiment with current quantum cryptography.

Although information is hard to come by, China reportedly has quantum key distribution technology over fibre optic cable between Beijing and Shanghai. In essence, a quantum internet, providing hundreds of kilometres of totally secure communications.

The West is intent on catching up, with governments and companies spending large sums. Germany, for instance, announced in May a €2bn investment in quantum and related technologies, while a month later British start-up Arquit announced a link with defence company Northrop Grumman to explore its own end-to-end quantum encryption.  Meanwhile, the US Department of Energy last year unveiled a blueprint for a quantum internet.

The Cold War arms race mostly involved creating weapons of destruction, the so-called Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) doctrine which, arguably, kept the peace over many decades. In the 21st century, the most important advance in keeping world peace will be security and protection: Mutually Assured Defence – not as MAD.

Power to the People

The merging of business and politics

GLOBAL TRENDS AND WHAT THEY MEAN FOR BOARDS OF DIRECTORS

This column was first delivered as a webinar to Z/Yen Group and the Financial Services club, which you can listen to here

Firstly, many thanks to my dear friend, Alderman, Professor and Sheriff Michael Mainelli for asking me to share some thoughts with you.

INTRODUCTION

Covid-19 and its economic effects are not going away anytime soon. We will be seeing a reconfiguration of our systems, ranging from geopolitical relations to the power of national governments, from company accounts to working patterns.

Some say the new paradigm is but an acceleration of existing trends. I wouldn’t disagree, but there is a point at which acceleration leads us into a new world, one where we must change our outlook. One where the responsibilities of Boards of Directors broaden out into the wider world. THAT is what I will focus on today.

For simplicity’s sake, I have divided this speech into three.

• THE RISK COMMITTEE

• THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEES

• THE AUDIT COMMITTEE 

What I am saying for each one equally applies to executives and entrepreneurs and, naturally, to the main Boards. 

RISK COMMITTEE

Black Swan Events

That famous phrase used by author Nassim Nicholas Taleb. Arguably a pandemic is not a Black Swan event when Bill Gates publicly – publicly! – talked about how unprepared governments were in a video a few years ago. But let us not quibble about definitions.

What matters is that Risk Committees need to expand the subjects on their agenda.

There will be other pandemics. There will be unseasonal flooding and bush fires like those in Australia. Climate change is a given and its effects on natural resources and economies are key. Take a recent catastrophe in Russia where the thawing permafrost lead to 20,000 tons of diesel spilling into the Norilsk River.

Geopolitically we are in a world of increasing nationalism and maverick leaders where the web of US-led, post-war institutions no longer function. Where does the dialogue and the negotiating happen now?

I will just mention three key countries.

RUSSIA. President Putin’s poll numbers are plummeting; Covid-19 deaths are more than the government’s corrupt statistics office will reveal; the oil-dependent Russian economy has been battered by record-low oil prices. Putin will need to engineer a distraction, this year or in 2021 – another invasion, perhaps Belarus? Or cutting off electricity supplies in some small corner of the West? Or a cyberattack in a port area…they (or perhaps another country like North Korea or Iran) have done it before in Rotterdam. 

CHINA – it is too large a subject to deal with in this webinar! Let me just say that China was never the West’s best friend, an assumption held by the government of David Cameron, but neither is China our worst enemy, President Trump’s current assumption. Bringing those supply chains back from China, the new ‘localism’, ain’t that easy!

THE US – Trump is embattled. There are major doubts that he can win the November election. Creating more division inside the US – the enemy within - isn’t enough. I would expect some new narrative and action around “the enemy without” – new tariffs, new trade wars, take your pick.

Rising Inequality

Pope Francis in his Urbis & Orbis Easter homily spoke about a “dignified life”. We are going to have millions…and millions… and millions… of unemployed. Whether the US unemployment rate is 13% or higher – you are all aware of the recent controversy about the numbers - it is bound to head up vertically. As will our numbers.

And the so-called full employment we had in much of the West was a lie, with zero-hour contracts, no ability to save, no margin for error. We left too many people behind on the back of globalisation and automation. Re-incorporating them (plus all those who falling headlong into unemployment now) into working society and a dignified life is an enormous challenge. If the corporate sector is not part of the solution, it will be perceived as part of the problem.

The divide on economic policy between left and right is fast disappearing. The evidence? President Macron of France spoke about the need to transform our capitalist societies due to their environmental and social inequality failures. A discussion about the Universal Basic Income is now mainstream. British trade union Unison saw a net increase of 16,000 in their members, which is 18% higher than in the same period last year.

I urge you to read a dystopian 1952 novel by Kurt Vonnegut, Piano Player.

Government

After the financial crisis, the pendulum of power for financial services and banks swung back towards government and the regulators. Even more so now. Big government is back.

To keep businesses like airlines going they will be forced to turn loans into equity stakes. After all loans, even at low rates, don’t do the trick when the revenues aren’t there.

Circumstances, not ideology, have put government in the ascendant at the expense of the private sector. With the best will in the world, they won’t be able to sell those shareholdings anytime soon, and so they will influence how companies are run, how they interact with their suppliers, how they deal with their financials.

Of course, the biggest risk and opportunity is Quantum Computing. I am no expert, but as a shareholder in a quantum computing company, I have been exposed to some of the mind-blowing possibilities and would urge any board to be constantly updated on advances.

THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEES

People

This section is really about people. How do you attract the most talented people? Speaking mainly to a City audience, let me point out we have a problem – and this is relevant for financial and professional services in other OECD countries.

The City was where the best and the brightest in my generation headed. Now, they more generally head to Google or start-ups, they join NGOs or set up their own.  Former City Minister Mark Hoban chaired a Financial Services Skills Taskforce which found a skills and talent crisis in the sector, issues with purpose and culture and not enough continuous education.

Attracting the best and the brightest is one problem. But the unemployed are also your problem. The deprived are your problem. Racism is your problem. There is no longer a separation between politics and business.

In the words of Martin Luther King: “In the end we will remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends.”

From Larry Fink of BlackRock to UK CEOs, companies have spoken out on the back of the Black Lives Matter movement. Some have announced special schemes or are looking anew at their recruitment. Those that haven’t are probably making a mistake. Because if you consider the demonstrators, and those who have spoken up on social media – all races, including a lot of whites.

A larger proportion of companies’ workforces are made up of millennials and Generation Z, and they CARE. They look for work/life alignment, where they can be the same person at work and at home, and they want to be proud of the company they work for.

Diversity & Inclusion

Look at it like ESG (Environmental Social Governance). That ‘E’ no longer sits in some far-off office and is trotted out once a year. Mark Carney, the former Governor of the Bank of England first highlighted the financial risk from stranded assets and, in parallel, the opportunities. The Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund recently sold its Glencore shareholding for breaching it guidance on coal use.

Similarly, the ‘S’ in ESG, or Diversity & Inclusion, is now central. It is about risk and it is about innovation. To mitigate risk and think laterally we need diverse opinions which are encouraged and listened to.

That is why I am the Co-founder of the newest institute at the London School of Economics, The Inclusion Initiative, which uses behavioural science and data to improve innovation and the bottom line. My Co-Founder Professor Grace Lordan and I are in conversation with financial and professional firms about their becoming partners in this endeavour.

Do please get in touch if you think it might be of interest to you.

A few last words on people. Communication and collaboration are key skill sets. Empathetic leadership and the ability to understand what drives your many different stakeholders is something that no leader can do without. Chose them wisely.

“Build back better” is a phrase you may have heard. Understand what the impulse behind it is, for it will affect the future of companies.  

THE AUDIT COMMITTEE

Resilience

In the financial crisis, the banks were bailed out by the government. The regulators then forced them to increase their capital and work on changing their culture. That is why we are not facing a financial sector crisis, at least at the moment.

The corporate sector is different. Companies are being run in an “efficient” way. Cut costs to a minimum, carry as little capital as possible, get that ROE up.

That’s finished.

For two reasons. One, the realisation that the Black Swan world we live in demands higher capital sums and more focus on cash, or cash equivalents. The amplitude of the events we are facing is such that this is necessary.

Two. Treating employees as contractors, or outsourcing to India, and then focusing excessively on shareholders, is a discredited model. It now turns out to be a very risky one. One bank CEO said to me she thinks differently about employees in India whose circumstances mean lockdown and isolation aren’t possible.

And, as mentioned earlier, government and regulators will be much more powerful and involved in the private sector than before. They also don’t like that model. The new Stewardship Code, for instance, calls for more high-quality integrated reporting.

Costs still need to be cut, but automation, robotics and AI are now the focus, plus having 30% or more of your workforce on agile working, depending on your business, which will also save on real estate fixed costs – with  huge implications for commercial real estate.

Fraud

I have only one word. It’s going to be HUGE. I presume accountants are more than aware of this. Anecdotally I already know about one private equity-held company that took government furlough money in a month when it had no right to. When you have convulsions in funding, opportunities for misbehaviour increase.

Taxes

Look out for windfall taxes on some of the corporate sector. Governments are desperate for funds. They will hit individuals – a wealth tax perhaps, getting rid of the vestiges of the Non-Dom regime, a rise in income tax – but they can’t raise VAT as consumption needs to come back. That leaves the corporate sector in their crosshairs.

I hope, and perhaps this is more hope than reality, this crisis will lead to the proper taxation of the Googles and Amazons of this world. And not just taxes. Elon Musk, the Tesla and Space X entrepreneur, recently called for the break-up of Amazon. And I just read a convincing case for a digital advertising monopoly suit against Google, co-written by a Yale professor who’d been in the Anti-Trust unit of the US’s Department of Justice a few years ago.

Maybe, just maybe, the employees of the Facebooks and the Twitter’s will be the impulse behind proper corporate taxes on their employers? It is far-fetched as a theory, I will grant you that, but they aren’t afraid to be heard. In 2018, for instance, 20,000 Google employees – yes, 20,000 – walked out in protest at their company’s handling of sexual harassment.

CONCLUSION

In 2015 a client for the Robinson Hambro CEO Advisory service who was the Executive Chairman of a bank asked me to give a talk to his Global Advisory Board. My theme was that globalisation had peaked. Very prescient, if I say so myself, coming before Trump and Brexit. In case you think I have a crystal ball, let me say I also predicted Putin would be out of power in Russia. You can’t win them all!

The point of this story is that we cannot predict the future. But executives and non-executives can consider trends and responsibilities within Boards, within the Risk Committee, the Nominations and Remuneration Committees, and the Audit Committee, and act accordingly.

Thank you for listening. And now, the fun bit for me, I much look forward to your comments and questions.

The lightweight vs the heavyweight

A few simple truths on world trade

Getting to be a heavyweight boxing champion takes many years of training, a top coach and clear rules of engagement. Talent may well be the least of it.

The UK is sadly bereft of all of these as it bravely makes its way in a world where the boxing ring is riven with cracks and the ropes are frayed and broken. Trade giants of the likes of Peter Sutherland and Pascal Lamy built the global trade structure brick by brick, compromise by comprise, backed most notably and most crucially by the US.

But President Donald Trump’s disdain for traditional allies and alliances extends to the World Trade Organisation and its carefully wrought rules, which are in any case due for modernisation in a services and digital centred world. The application of unilateral tariffs on China, leading to an exchange of tit-for-tat, is not the worst of it. Rather, it is taking the fight outside the ring, as Mr Trump did by pressuring Canada to arrest the CFO of Huawei, the Chinese telecoms giant, or blackmailing Mexico with a progressive 5% tariff on exports if it did not do more to curb illegal immigrants from Central America.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson last week held out the exciting prospect of a trade deal with the US in 2020. Here are five home truths on global trade which he might wish to share with the nation.

• Number 1. Protectionism extends across both American political parties. It has been a recurrent theme in US politics since the founding of the country . The only time it has been superseded in the last few decades is when the sitting President was given Fast Track Authority by Congress, unshackling him from Congressional approval. Trump doesn’t hold it now, nor will he even if he wins a second term. Additionally, Democratic House of Representatives leader Nancy Pelosi has made it very clear that a bipartisan group in Congress will block any US/UK trade pact if Brexit imperils peace in Northern Ireland due to the removal of the Irish border backstop.

• Number 2. Countries closest to you are those you are most likely to trade with. Thus the UK’s largest trading partner is the EU – it may be growing slowly, compared to markets like China, but it is affluent, with trade and commercial trust well established. It also shares a world view which underpins domestic legislation in all EU countries on the environment, food safety and digital privacy. The US has what both the UK and the EU would call lower standards on these issues. Tales of US chlorinated chicken making its way into British supermarkets are not far off the mark.

• Number 3. The UK’s exports to China are not going to take off like a rocket when and if the UK leaves the EU. Former Prime Minister Theresa May may have spoken of “ambitious future trade arrangements” with China last year. From within the EU, Germany’s exports to China have been far superior to the UK’s at $110 billion compared to $22 billion. The simple truth is that they produce goods and services which the Chinese want more. Nor will the depreciation of sterling help. Despite a 29% fall in the pound’s value since 2000, the UK’s export market share of world trade has fallen, according to a recent Schroders report.

• Number 4. The EU signed a trade deal with South America’s Mercosur trade block earlier this year. It took two decades of on and off talks. This is not unusual for trade deals. And it may not see the light of day as approval is needed by the Parliaments of countries involved. President Trump’s tweet suggesting a trade deal between the US and the UK within a year was ludicrous.

• Number 5. Earlier this week Mr Johnson said he wanted trade liberalisation between the UK and the US in products including pillows, cauliflowers, wallpaper and railway carriages – odd that he failed to mention services, 80% of the economy versus 18% for manufacturing. He complained about “some kind of bureaucratic obstacle” stopping the sale of British-made shower trays and “some sort of food and drug administration restriction” stopping the sale of Melton Mowbray pies. These are exactly what trade negotiations are about. Regulatory agencies, like the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), are among the most powerful players at the table.

When it comes to the services sector, it is worth noting what happened at a friendlier time a few years ago when the EU and the US were negotiating a trade deal. The US Treasury adamantly rejected any market opening to the UK’s stellar financial and professional services sector. That won’t change in the more hostile and nationalistic “America First” that now prevails.

In a world of heavyweights, the UK (population 60 million) is a lightweight. As part of the EU (population 450 million), it is a heavyweight that could take on other heavyweights, like the US (population 327 million) and China (population 1.4 billion). On its own, I fear it will be KO’d.