The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF intervention. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
>> MODERATOR: Good morning distinguished delegates, panelists, and global citizens. It's an honour to welcome you to this defining moment here in Lillestrom and Oslo, the city of Nobel peace prize.
The world has long gathered to reflect on what means to secure peace for humanity. Today we extend that reflection into cyberspace. We are profound and also proud privilege to announce the Cyber Peace Index. A global initiative to adopt the need to not only measure security in the digital world, but also to inspire cyber peace. A vision of our digital future built on trust, resilience, rights, and responsibility. This is more than an index. It's an evolving dynamic framework designed to keep pace of transformation of technology from misinformation to cyber warfare. And just as peace cannot be imposed by one actor alone, the index is built through a multi stakeholder approach involving garment regulators, technology platform, Civil Society, and digital right advocates, academia, the Technical Community, and most importantly, the people whose lives are shaped by these systems.
The cyber peace index does not aim to rank. It aims to inform, empower, and activate. It's supports national strategies, it challenges platforms to build better guardrails, equips communities to demand digital community. It navigates toward a safe, inclusive digital ecosystem. The index aligns with the global compact like WSIS+20, the Global Digital Compact. But more than that, it aims to set a new normative direction.
Today we extend that reflection into cyberspace. We are privileged to announce the Cyber Peace Index. It measures security in the digital world but also to inspire cyber peace. A digital future built on rights and responsibilities. It's more an index. It's an evolving dynamic framework.
The index is built through a multi stakeholder approach involving environmental regulators, technology platform, Civil Society, and digital rights advocates, academia, the Technical Community, and the people whose lives are shared by these systems.
The cyber peace index aims to inform, empower, and activate. It challenges platforms to have better guardrails. It equips communities. And it helps us all navigate towards a safe, inclusive, ecosystem. The index aligns with global compact like WSIS+20 and the UN SGDs. It aims to set a new normative production. That cyber peace is essential. From the country and city that celebrates peace. We begin a new journey. Cyber trust becomes a global public good. Thank you for being part of this historic moment. With this, in fact, we would like to introduce the panel of speakers who are present here.
We have been joined by Mr. Suresh Yadav. A leader on AI digital transformation we have at environmental advisory committee for ICANN. Ana, an associate professor. And senior legal manager for the European centre for nonprofit. The session will be moderated by me. I'm the Founder of Cyber Peace. And Dr. Subi Chaturvedi a global SVP at Public Policy Offer InMObi. Over to You.
>> SUBI CHATURVEDI: Thank you so much. Huge congratulations are in order. It's a very, very big day. And a historic milestone. I'm really, really happy that we're celebrating the launch of the Cyber Peace Index. Cyber is a world that comes first to us that are digital leaders and peace is something we've been working towards. So a huge round of applause is in order. For months and months of hard work and the oil we've been burning make sure that multi stakeholders. And able to create something we want to take for all future generations and something that we cherish, which is the internet.
I'm happy that we have a room that is truly representative of diversity and truly inclusive. It's so good to see friends on the panel today. And, also, for me, IGF will be my home. A member of the United Nations Multi Stakeholder Advisory Committee. Those were good times and moments we have cherish.
To set the context, first, why is it that this is so important. I think it's critical to remember that the malicious cyber attack came in 1988. And it was designed by university graduate. And it was intended only as an experiment to measure the size of the internet. But inadvertently caused disruption. It affected 10% of the internet at the time. Systems slowed down or systems crashed. Today as we have this panel, at the very, very amazing host country. Cyber is the a a cross roads. We're hoping to secure our digital future in 2025. That's the theme this panel is exploring. When we look at 2025, cyber warfare is no longer an emerging threat. This is in the launch of the index is very important. It is today a global reality. I lead the global charter at INMOBI. We have created devices. We have ensured we're enabling even the last mile for connectivity. And we are bridging digital divide. Ensuring that the internet is not just something that you come and experience but create it as as safe space. So global realities are shifting in the current geopolitical scenario. Both aspects of geopolitics, development as well as human security become paramount. And global governments are facing this question. So, therefore, very, very important it becomes rule of the Technical Community, academia, think tanks. With over 50 cyber attacks per sec. Now they're targeting critical infrastructure worldwide. And the cost of cyber crime has surpassed over $10.5 trillion. So the need for holding institutions accountable and for also constantly building capacity to make sure that regulators, as well as policy makers are playing catch up. This has never been more urgent. It couldn't have been more timely. Therefore, as digital technologies continue to expand into every facet of life, from AI‑powered public services to quantum systems. We can foster. We can foster inclusivity. And stability instead of ensuring that we're all dealing with conflict.
So this year we will spotlight the intersections between technological innovation, cyber conflict, and the global quest for a secure and resilient digital future. Therefore, in this session, we aim to provide a road map for action by government platforms, the private sector, and Civil Society alike.
So the numbers we've talked about, one more figure that needs to be highlighted is 45% of all breaches now involve AI generated phishing and social engineering. And there is a sharp rise that is driven by generative content. And, therefore, to make sure that the internet I want to pay attribute to one of the fathers of the internet who has been a mentor and someone I look up to. The fact that we have to insist on upholding the core values of the internet. Which are interoperability, upholding of human rights, ensuring that innovation can thrive. Therefore, believe is at the heart of everything that we hold dear. It's very, very critical. So human error remains one of the weakest links.
So it has to be a key pillar of what we're talking about. And new conflicts are increasingly talking about cyber attacks, which are being used as precursors or amplifiers of warfare. There is impressing questions about international humanity law in cyberspace. And, therefore, spotlighting national security and sovereignty is very, very critical. Part of modern warfare. Being used to disable critical infrastructure like hospitals and defense networks. In a world of antisemitic threats, even nonstate actors can launch attacks which are disrupting nations.
You will always make sure that national sovereignty and security will take precedence. We have to ensure all of us come together and all of us work together to be able to create a multi stakeholder environment where freedom of speech and expression are still held dear. And able to balance citizen rights along with cybersecurity. Maintaining cyber peace becomes essential and preserve sovereignty.
Disinformation can exacerbate propaganda. Cyber peace is, I think, clearly the answer. We need what we're doing together in this historic moment is ever more critical. So securing information ecosystems, which can prevent manipulation during elections, protests, and global negotiations are important. The other pillar is critical infrastructure vulnerabilities. So transportation, banking, health care, water systems with, and nuclear facilities. All of them are digitally interconnected today. It highly explores and something that the Index deals with. As well as global independence and economic stability. I think enough and more needs to be said about protection of civil and human rights. So conflicts related to cyber attacks are often targeting civilians. They're destructing access to health care, education, and communication. And one of the ideas we want to highlight today as we take the discussion further is still there is a gap. A lot of, you know, has been made to clear global norms. We need more guidelines. We also need 40,000 feet above the ground principles.
One like nuclear or chemical weapons. So in the absence of clear rules, peace‑building mechanisms like multilateral cooperation. It's going to be ever more critical. And, therefore, we see this as an enabler for peace‑building and dialogue. So technology can also be used to monitor cease‑fires, enable humanitarian aid and facilitate cross‑border dialogue. And ensuring peaceful cyberspace that allows digital tools. That allows amazing minds to flourish and create a resilient ecosystem. So they serve as instruments of peace and not terror.
And just to end, I think it's important to highlight cyber peace as a growing digital power and member of forums like the G20 for the U.N. And there's been championing responsible cyber behavior. They're going to be the host in February 2026 of the AI Impact Summit.
I think this is where technology for good. And initiatives and leadership in cyber diplomacy, Digital Public Infrastructure, capacity building, as well as a moral ecosystem that is built on frugal innovation can be lessons we can cherish and celebrate. And many congratulations, I think, to all a of us, again, for being part of of the historic milestone. Over to you, Vineet. I would love to hear more.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you for setting the context. Before I move to our first speaker, Mr. Suresh Yadav, Senior Director for AI for Trade, Oceans and Natural Resources. I've been part of the AI consortium with him. He's been one of the key persons on leading the consortium. And key activities that government Secretariats had taken. Before I head to you, Suresh Yadav, I request the team to showcase the presentation. I want to show to everyone the metrics we have factored in for the index. We have compared around 10 index data. And the oxford cyber crime index. And the cyber peace index is slightly different. The rising digital threats. The digital world faces increasing threats like was highlighted. The issue of AI generative misinformation, attacks on targeting nations, and individuals. And threat limitations of the existing indexes, like, most emphasis compliance and cyber policies. Overlooking real time user safety like trust and safety of the end users are something that we find missing. And there is a need for a new framework of inclusive indexes. Which is essential to measure digital trust of harm and resilience dynamically. So keeping that in mind, this is how the cyber peace index has come into play. Which is citizens‑centric. It focuses on the issues that I just highlighted.
We are aiming to achieve real‑time capabilities. These are the 10 pillars or what we call the 10 majors of the index.
These are some of the samples trying to build the dash board. This is sample. It's not actual data but this is how the index will appear country to country comparison of a score that will get highlighted. The chart. And all these features are getting incorporated. We have done a study on the indexes. Maybe we have a shortage of time. I'll leave it for later. We'll put it on the website for everybody to see. And, also, maybe at the end, we'll leave QR code so people can be a part, join the link as a Google form. They can be a part of the Global Advisory Council and we're open for suggestions and feedback as the index continues to evolve.
So these are some of the comparisons we have made. Which will be available on the website. The Eu cybersecurity index. We have also seen a global terrorism index. The cyber peace index. And the future vision of the index is to expand real‑time analytics to capture emerging digital threats and user experiences worldwide. Inclusivity, develop specialized quantum cybersecurity, emerging technologies, and enhance for policy makers and researchers.
With this now, in fact, I'm just sharing the link for anyone in the community. I think it's a multi stakeholder approach. So industry, academia, Civil Society, technical groups, and also citizen can join the advisory board by scanning the link. We'll share the link in the chat for people to join. And with that, now, I'd like to head to our speaker, Suresh Yadav.
>> SURESH YADAV: I hope you can hear me. Thank you very much. And good evening. Thank you, Vineet to me to share some of my thoughts.
First of all, a big congratulations to you and your entire team for this very innovative tool. You are trying to bring together all the relevant indexes around the world and create a new index, which really takes into account the peace work and the SDG work. It's very innovative thinking. So huge congratulations.
And, also, very thoughtful to host this launch event in city of Peace. Where the peace resonates in each and every part of that city. So that's very powerful. Thank you for that.
I just wanted to highlight that the world economy, which is around $210 trillion at the moment. Expected to be around $340 trillion by 2030. And, also, the artificial intelligence has been mentioned that is going to contribute around $15 trillion from 2023 to 2030. And AI is going to accelerate further this whole process.
But at the same time if you look at the global cyber cost to the economy, it's estimated to be around $10.5 trillion in 2025. This was, I mean, it's the third largest economy in terms of size. If you look at the USA and China. And this economy was around $2.1 trillion in 2015. It was $6 trillion in 2021. And it has been growing in a rapid space of 15% growth. The fastest growing segment, if you've seen in terms of global economy.
And what does that mean? It means that there are a lot of people who are making money on the name of the committing crimes and the fraud and the scams. Economies are losing. People are losing.
It means that the countries, the society, and the people are not able to respond to themselves. And this is where the market has failed. This is where you need investment from the different areas. To guide the investment in a particular direction, you need certain parameters. Where you know which direction to go for getting the investment. So I see this great work done by the Cyber Peace in terms of the designing, in terms of directing, in terms of the investors. Within the country and outside the country that where you need to put your money. I see from a different perspective this will give a lot of food for thought to the various investors and people to see and identify the country. I see it as a form of cyber diagnostic investment opportunities in these directions. Apart from bringing the country on the map on this cyber issue.
All those parameters which has been mentioned. And, also, linking it up with the SDGs, I think is a great thing. As we know, we have been lagging on the various SDGs. There's already what you do to accelerate. I think this is an added tool in the SDGs for the global society to look into the whole process.
So Vineet, once again, I have to go for another meeting. I just left a meeting to join you. Once again, congratulations to you and your entire team for the innovative index. I'm sure that the entire work you have done will make the society, make the world, make the countries a much safer space. Make the internet a safer space. Particularly when the speed and the quantum of the cyber attacks are increasing. And I would point out that actors do challenge or destroy or damage largely to the state economy and government economy. So that's where I think if we invite a lot of attention, if we invite a lot of interest in the various forums, the comments, Civil Society, private sector, Academies, and research institutes who will take this index as a benchmark in carving out the further activities. So thank you very much. And I wish you all the best in this endeavor!
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. Thank you for taking the time to join the event. Moving from online to offline. Now I would like to invite my next speaker, Nico, Nico to you.
>> NICO CABALLERO: Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you for the invitation. My name is Nico. I'm the chair at ICANN. An honour it for many e to stand before you in the milestone 20th IGF in Oslo. Where collaboration and innovation define our shared vision for digital governance. Today, as we launch, you know, the cyberspace index, which was already explained, we take a critical step toward quantifying what was once abstract. The stability, security, and inclusivity of our digital ecosystems.
So why this index matters for governments in general. So whether it's shaping national policies or negotiating global frameworks you know, we need actionable metrics to guide these issues. And I'm speaking as a data scientist. Right.
You know, this index, the cyberspace index provides exactly that. A compass to begin complex cyber landscapes. Basically align with the IGF theme. Building governance together. By offering a transparent, multi stakeholder tool to assess risks like cyber conflict, as already mentioned, digital divides, and threats to critical infrastructure and many other things. I don't need to get into the details.
For instance, the just to give some more color. The index can spotlight disparities in digital resilience. Such as, for example, Africa's 38% internet connectivity gap. You know, or the gender divide leaving more than 189 million more men online than women globally. By measuring these gaps, you know, governments can target investments and policies more effectively ensuring, you know, basically that no one is left behind in our digital future, so to say.
There's another thing I would like to point out, which is the let's say the open‑source imperative. You know, the choice to develop this index using open‑source software is both strategic and symbolic. Open‑source embodies the IGF's spirit of collaboration. Allowing governments, Civil Society, and technologies to scrutinize, adapt, and improve the tool collectively. As we've seen with initiatives like open SSF you know, open‑source security tools you know, basically thrive when communities unite to address vulnerabilities and share Best Practices.
Moreover, transparency is, you know, in the index is methodology. Again, enabled by open‑source. Builds trust. Very important concept, in my opinion. Just as Norway's digital emblem initiative protects humanitarian infrastructure through open standards. The cyberspace index can become a global public good free from proprietary constraints, or geopolitical silos. So, you know finally you know, a call to action for everybody for not only governments but Civil Society, academia, and so on. So I would just say that, you know, we should commit to three principles. The first one to adopt the index to inform national cyber strategies and international cooperation. In the second place, contribute, you know, to its open‑source framework ensuring it evolves we merging threats like AI‑driven disinformation. Just to give an example. And number three, to champion inclusivity ensuring the index reflects, you know, the needs of nations. Especially those most all vulnerable to cyber instability, so to say.
In closing, the cyberspace index isn't just a metric. It's a manifesto for collective actions. So as shared, I would encourage, I would urge governments to embrace this tool. Not as a, you know, a static report card, you know, but as a living platform for progress. Together, you know, we can turn data into dialogue and dialogue into lasting cyber peace, which is the main point for this conference. So thank you so much.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. And you made a very important point. It's not a metric. But it's a manifesto for a collective action. And I'm sure this is how the index as it grows and evolves and we'll see into action.
With that, I move on to the next speaker, Ana, associate professor in Russia. Anna, can you see us?
>> ANNA STYNIK: Can you hear me?
Yes. Good afternoon everyone. Thank you for the opportunity to share my reflections on the launch of the Cyber Peace Index it's timely and ambitious initiative. Especially as digital threats continue to multiply.
So, first of all, let me sincerely congratulate my colleagues on an excellent and thoughtful presentation.
What I personally find most important and even inspiring is that this index doesn't follow the usual, like, hard power logic. It brings a new lens, digital peace and societal well being. That is a very different citizen‑centred vision. And that's exactly, I think, what the world needs right now. So today humanity finds itself at a turning point. Of course, because of the rapid development of AI. It's bringing growing number of complex interconnected threats. And societies are struggling to adapt fast enough. While states are, like, increasingly thrown into competitive race to develop and deploy AI technologies.
And in such an environment we all live in, reaching consensus on global rules and safe guards becomes extremely difficult task. And against this backdrop, the initiative presented today offers a much‑needed perspective. So this starts not only ‑‑ not from the top‑down but bottom‑up. Instead of focusing solely on state power or institutional frameworks, it seeks to understand the shared digital experience of ordinary people across the world.
And perhaps by identifying common challenges faced by citizens in different countries, we can begin to uncover areas a of general consensus. Areas where international agreement is urgently needed. This is why it's particularly meaningful this initiative is being launched under the offices of the United Nations. The only universal platform where such inclusive long‑term level frameworks for peace and governance can be developed. In this time of fragmentation and distrust, the Cyber Peace Index may help us reach a new global dialogue. At the same time we have to acknowledge the challenges. How do we measure digital peace? Like, what does peace‑centric mean in practice? The framework presented here with the 10 pillars is strong and visionary. But the key issues measurement logic, I think would be the future. Like, for example, how to ‑‑ how we quantify psychological resilience. And how do we assign weights across 10 very different domains. And how can we ensure comparability across nations. Especially those with limited open data. Or low transparency. And I believe one of the great contributions on the CPI is that as goes beyond already what we have. Like the CPI offers something broader. It's kind of umbrella index. And so it is just important to gradually move from a broad vision toward greater quantitative clarity. And I think clear identification of data sources will play a key role in strengthening credibility of the index.
National efforts can provide valuable input, but they sometimes may reflect uneven levels of transparency or consistency. And in this regard, citizen level surveys could offer an important complement. Helping to reflect public perceptions of safety in a more grounded and inclusive place.
So partnerships would serve institutions, including local organizations. I think it could support the development of reliable indicators. And collaborative international research would also add depths and comparability. Especially as a joint process rather than reliance on external data sets alone.
So, last but not least, it's also important, I think, to reflect on how to ensure broad global relevance. So particularly for countries of the global south. So factors such as digital divides, disparities in AI development deserve careful consideration. So dynamics can help avoid reinforcing the various measures that the initiatives seeks to address.
So dear colleagues, to conclude, I believe this index has revolutionary potential. It invites us to ask how to protect people together. Their rights, safety, peace of mind. That, in my view, is the future we should build together. And thank you. I look forward to collaborating with you on making this vision measurable and shared reality. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. Thank you so much, Anna. And thank you for your remarks. We have around seven minutes left. We have a few voices to be heard. So now the senior legal manager to share his views. Over to you.
>> SPEAKER: Yeah, thank you so much. And I'll keep it short. I know we're running out of time. Congratulations to the index. I haven't had time to review it. We look at how AI impacts human rights. I'm based in San Francisco. I'll share a few remarks on how AI and impactive AI does often exclude the global majority and the types of things we'd like to see.
So one thing I often say when we think about AI governance is that algorithmic driven systems rarely warrant a new approach. The new thing is the scale and speed at which it operates.
And, really, perpetuating and amplifying existing human rights risks. With already marginalized groups such in the global majority. One thing we want to see when we talk about AI governance is real‑world harm today. As opposed to the arguably overblown concerns of risk and AI misalignment. Which we hear about in silicon valley. And in some European or U.S. policy discussions. One of the favourite things I love to say about AI is that it it neither artificial nor intelligent. What I mean, it requires a lot of computing power. It's embedded in hardware of physical infrastructure and the global economy. And I think that's where we see one of the biggest issues today of the global majority. Is that digitalization often relies on the global north. There's disproportionate data centres are based in Europe and in the U.S. and in China. There's just been a "New York Times" article a few days ago on the global AI divide. I will say that the data centres have their own negative repercussions, including environmental. I'm not sure if global majority wants more data centres. But that to say that data centres and hardwares such as microchips, compute power, software, the financing, really where money goes to these technologies, the data, skills, education are primarily in Silicon Valley and the global north. How do we redistribute to the global majority.
Something to consider, I don't know if the index looks into this. Ghost labour. Folks labeling the data, moderating content for algorithmic moderation systems are often in the global majority further creating that gap between resources and power and money.
So that concentration of power really does lie within a handful of organizations. And when we think about large language models or foundation models, it's even more the case. You see a handful of companies building the technologies and holding that power.
However, one thing that I've been excited about to see in the global majority is that there are alternative approaches LLMs are emerging. We've seen in the work community‑led initiatives in the global majority that focus on public interest driven AI development. And LNP developers putting together data sets in local languages and Arabic and really around the world in Peru. And that highlights the potential for more culturally informed algorithmic systems. These model, though smaller in scale than the Chat GPT or Gemini demonstrate comparable performance such as translation. And really shows us the potential for more rights‑based participatory AI development that does not rely on AI and LLM providers.
Something I wanted to flag is language inequities in AI development. Most models are trained on data rooted in colonial and imperialist dynamics. It leads to discriminatory outcomes. Especially for marginalized groups. We've seen some debasing efforts to debase the data. But these have shown limited effectiveness. And still significant performance gaps that persist between dominant colonial languages, like French, Spanish, German, and more underrepresented languages especially dialects or countries that do not have the enough data that is used to train these systems.
Something that we often forget, as well, is in addition to the data, cultural nuance is often lost when building the systems. And then once they are developed, there's poor benchmarking that prevents AI developers from adequately identifying and addressing discriminatory impacts.
Just a few other things to consider is that there's a lot of relationships between AI developers and governments. Including support for governments with authoritarian practices and the impacts it has to human rights communities and marginalized groups around the world.
And there is conversation around developing AI, often comes from a techno solutionist approach. And these are often inadequate products and solution that do not fit the local or regional context that are not built with meaningful participation from communities and local voices are excluded.
And that's both the case in the development of the technologies and then the validation. One thing we see, for example, when we think about foundation models, in particular, is reinforced learning. Human feedback. I won't go into details about that. But those are mostly ‑‑ that's mostly done in Silicon Valley and definitely excludes groups from the global majority.
Before I share a few thoughts on AI ‑‑
>> MODERATOR: Sorry. We're out of time. A quick remark.
>> SPEAKER: Yeah. We have 20 seconds. So, no. Thank you for inviting and we're supportive. And would like to lean in and participate in the development on the index. I think sometimes we joke about world peace. But I think that it is in this time of real challenges we have to insist on peace as an option as a preferred option.
I want to leave with just quickly three suggestions. One, to reframe the digital security concept into digital resilience. That is, I think, very important. Earlier in the week, we talked about this, as well. And in the index, I think that will be useful because resilience and not retaliation is about peace. And that's where we need to be.
We also shouldn't shy away from geopolitics. And I think that's part of what the index looks into, as well. And that leads to the question of digital sovereignty. And the sovereignty, in that sense, it's not only the national sovereignty. I think it was mentioned earlier, it's about balancing personal digital rights and personal digital sovereignty against or together with national digital sovereignty that is important. Recently our programme Net Mission actually Asian Youth are calling for reclaiming agency over the data. And that is a part of the index, I think, that's important. Which comes to agreement with Nico about open‑source and transparency. I want to echo what was said in the opening about your digital self belonging to you. That, I believe, is digital sovereignty. And personal digital sovereignty.
Finally, the third thing about the multilingual internet which we earlier talked about. I think we need to move away from an English‑first mentality into a multilingual by design approach. And how the index would take that into consideration in terms of the infrastructure, in terms of the resilience is something that I think is important. So, again, congratulations. And look forward to participating in this index.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you so much. Thank you to the speakers. And thank you to the IGF Secretariat for allowing us a few minutes. We'll continue the conversations and questions offline. Looking forward to the conversations.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. Vineet, can you hear us?
