Digital trust as a societal standard

Trust has always been the glue of any functioning society, but historically, it was rooted in direct human perception: we trusted what we could see, hear, feel, and verify with our own senses, as well as the reputation and consistency of others. The digital era already strained this: when most interactions moved online, we lost our full sensory toolkit and leaned almost entirely on visual perception, the image, the video, the text, to decide what’s real. It worked because we assumed photos don’t lie, videos show what happened, and a “realistic” look signals authenticity. Generative AI breaks that last pillar. When you can’t trust your eyes alone, because anything can be synthetically created to look “real”, the burden shifts from perception to verification. So the new trust model is:          • Not what you see is what you get, but what you can prove is what you can trust.          • Not your senses, but the systems you rely on: provenance, credentials, reputation, technical proofs.          • Not a passive act, but an active practice: constant checking, validating, and re-checking. In this sense, the big shift isn’t that trust is new, it’s that its foundation is moving from our senses to our systems. We’ve never had to outsource trust to technology at this scale before. That’s what’s fundamentally different now. #TrustInTheDigitalAge #ContentAuthenticity #VerifyDontTrust #SeeingIsNotBelieving #ProvenanceMatters #visualcontent #visualtech

It surprises me how underestimated the concept of secure data collaboration still is in business discussions, especially in the context of cyber risk mitigation. In recent years, we have seen a growing interest in technologies that allow companies to extract value from data without compromising its integrity or exposing sensitive information. From privacy-preserving machine learning to secure multiparty computation, the focus is shifting toward architectures that embed protection directly into the operational layers. This change does not come from fear alone. It comes from the awareness that trust is built not only through policies, but also through infrastructure choices. Secure cloud processing, encrypted analytics, and even data monetization models must be designed with transparency and resilience in mind. These solutions go beyond the technical layer and contribute to a deeper cultural change in how digital assets are managed and valued. Cybersecurity is no longer a separate concern. It is becoming an essential design principle that shapes how we innovate, interact, and grow in a connected world. #CyberSecurity #DataPrivacy #DigitalTrust

Is a centralized digital ID system an act of efficient governance or an invitation to surveillance? The architecture nations choose today defines tomorrow's digital social contract. In my latest newsletter, I compare three radically different approaches to e-government and data privacy in Nigeria, Estonia, and Rwanda: A. Nigeria (The Centralized Model): The NIMC’s unified database aims for efficiency but is struggling with a profound crisis of trust. Recurring data breaches have exposed sensitive details, with NINs and BVNs reportedly sold online for as little as ₦150. Legal clauses allowing data sharing without explicit individual consent in the "interest of National Security" further fuel public suspicion regarding surveillance. B. Estonia (The Distributed Model): Estonia built its digital state on trust through decentralization. Its data exchange layer, X-Road, adheres to the "Once-Only" principle, guaranteeing that citizens have full transparency over who accesses their data, setting a strong global standard for privacy by design. C. Rwanda (The Hybrid Model): Rwanda's Irembo platform prioritises inclusion. By combining online services with a robust network of over 4,000 physical agents, Rwanda ensures that citizens facing low digital literacy or lack of smart devices can still access essential services, bridging the digital divide. The operational critique is clear. The long-term success of digital public infrastructure hinges on governance, not just technology. Without robust legal safeguards and user control, systems designed for efficiency risk becoming tools of exclusion and control. Read the full article to see how these systems comply (or fail to comply) with modern data protection laws. #DigitalIdentity #Estonia #Nigeria #Rwanda #EGovernment #DataSovereignty #Privacy #TechPolicy

The European Union has just released its International Digital Strategy and it quietly shifts the global conversation. While many continue to focus on scaling modular systems and open APIs, the EU has taken a different path. This path is grounded in public law, legal enforceability, and institutional trust. This is not just another strategy document. It is a clear statement that digital trust must be governed. Countries such as Ukraine, India, Japan, Moldova, Brazil, and Singapore are already part of this shift. In Africa, Smart Africa is the only institutional partner named so far. The message is clear. Legal alignment is becoming the new standard for digital interoperability. I have written a brief analysis on why this matters and why it presents a fundamental challenge to approaches that separate code from law. European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) European Commission GovConsult Foundation Smart Africa #DigitalGovernance #DigitalIdentity #PublicInfrastructure #EUstrategy #Interoperability #eIDAS #TrustFrameworks #GovTech #LegalTech #DigitalSovereignty #SmartAfrica #AIgovernance #Cybersecurity #GlobalGateway #DataDiplomacy

🟥 A New Social Contract for the Digital Era In 1762, political philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau introduced the concept of a social contract, an agreement between individuals and governing authorities, grounded in mutual trust and shared responsibility. Nearly three centuries later, this principle remains highly relevant and now extends into the digital realm. We place our trust in digital systems and devices because they enable our lives to function seamlessly. In return, we expect security, reliability and transparency from the platforms, technologies and services we rely upon. When this trust is broken, the social contract unravels and confidence is eroded. This is why digital trust must not be viewed solely as a technical issue. It is, fundamentally, a societal concern that demands urgent and collective attention. 🔴 🇲🇾 Malaysia’s Commitment to Building Digital Trust How do we build a trustworthy digital ecosystem? It begins with a shift in mindset, strengthening standards to make devices and applications safer, and building ecosystems that foster confidence and assurance. Naturally, this must also be supported by strong and effective regulatory frameworks. Malaysia has taken several pioneering steps to promote digital trust. These include the landmark Cyber Security Act, which establishes a robust foundation for protecting our National Critical Information Infrastructure (NCII) from cyber threats; the creation of the National Cyber Security Committee; and the forthcoming amendments to the Personal Data Protection Act 2010, all of which provide the legal and regulatory infrastructure that underpins digital trust in our nation. In addition, the establishment of the National AI Office (NAIO) will ensure the development of safeguards and a comprehensive framework to promote the ethical and sustainable adoption of artificial intelligence technologies. 🌐💻🏙️ The upcoming ASEAN AI Malaysia Summit 2025 and Smart City Expo KL 2025 will also serve as building blocks for laying the foundations of long-term digital trust. ⚡ At the Ministry of Digital, digital trust is one of our core pillars. We remain steadfast in our mission to uphold it, ensuring a safer, more resilient and harmonious digital society for all Malaysians. #DigitalTrust #MalaysiaMADANI #RancakkanMADANI #MADANIbekerja