Special Issue: Finding Superman - The Security Community's Failure with Neurodivergence
A short essay explaining how Canada's security and defence community fails neurodivergent people
In December 2023, news about the indefinite hospital order for a $Lapsus hacker was shared widely amongst the cyber security and information security community. It came as no surprise that many were saying that such people should not be put in a hospital indefinitely but should be hired to work for the government because “neurodivergence is a superpower.” What these people usually don’t care enough to read is that the hacker in question is violent, attacked multiple people while in custody, and has repeatedly said that they would continue to conduct cyber crime. So what are people really saying when they say that such a person shouldn’t be in a hospital receiving help?
They are saying they care more about the abilities than the person. That neurodivergence is something to exploit.
This is why the Canadian security and defence community, and many others for that matter, will continue to fail those with neurodivergence.
As much as I would like to think that my ADHD gives me superpowers, all it has done for me is produce significant hardship and daily reminders that society is ready to kick us to the curb if we do not fit neatly into a box.
Making the argument that neurodiversity should be considered a “superpower” in cyber security, or any field for that matter, is demeaning and misses the entire point. Those with neurodivergence have brains that work differently, for good and bad, but the focus on hiring those with neurodivergence is much focused on how they have “superpowers.” This assumes that such people are like everyone else, but just have “enhanced” abilities, which is an atrocious and demeaning approach to take because you are fundamentally saying that you want these people for their usefulness and not as a person with different knowledge, skills, and abilities.
Just as we alter our physical spaces for those with physical disabilities to ensure inclusion and full use of spaces, so too many spaces must be approachable and welcoming to neurodivergent people. This is less about the physical space but more about the social space and how you include those who are neurodivergent. To expect all the same of people with neurodivergence without changing how you operate or conduct business is just as prone to failure as digital transformation without planning.
For these reasons, there will not be change in the Canadian defence and security space anytime soon. Canada’s security and defense academic community are broken into fiefdoms, reliant upon which figures you can brownnose enough to be within their circle of influence as a client. This goes even beyond academia, with industry and civil society just as guilty of this. This is not exclusive to Canada, but the acute issues of Canada’s dismissal as a security provider globally means that stagnation and doubling-down on existing ideas and approaches will only be doomed to fail.
If you want to produce change and start to challenge Canada’s current position domestically and globally, this has to begin domestically in terms of how we recruit those interested in Canadian security and defence. It is entirely false to assume there is no interest among younger people. On the contrary, there is massive amount of interest in security as a career. What they need is an actual entry and manner to break into the field. This does not mean a job or even an internship, but simply inclusion.
When you have the likes of the Policy Insight Forum charging “emerging leaders” $134, this is not about building leaders but about acquiring new clients. It is a common practice to charge students and emerging leaders, which I view as entirely counterproductive to the idea of actually fostering interest in Canadian defence and security. At what point must we consider that such organizations are not actually interested in promoting and advocating for Canadian security and defence versus looking at it as but another money making venture?
Many of these organizations know that younger people are desperate and eager to get involved, so it becomes a matter of if they want to foster this, educate and inform, and grow Canada’s defence sector, or if they need another $134 to pay for that week’s photocopies? This does not even address the fact that students and younger people are struggling more than ever under current financial strain. Cost of living has only gone up and school and provincial funding has either decreased or not changed. Charging such people $134 is a direct insult.
The Canadian security and defence community is just as responsible for Canada not being taken serious as a serious provider as the Government of Canada.