The global cyberspace faces many cybersecurity challenges, including illegal changes to contract terms and loopholes in the smart contract framework itself. This study adopts the automatic execution and intelligence of digital contracts, uses public key infrastructure technology digital certificates to establish trust relationships, encrypts data, and improves network security; the distributed ledger adopts the Byzantine fault-tolerant algorithm to prevent data from being tampered with, solving the problems of low efficiency and low security of traditional cyberspace manual governance. The study shows that after 28 companies applied digital contracts in 2023, the average authenticity of the data was 50.95% higher than the average authenticity of the data in 2022, the average integrity of the data was 36.44% higher than the average integrity of the data in 2022, and the average security of the data was 110.22% higher than the average security of the data in 2022. The findings highlight the critical role of digital contract implementation in enhancing the security and operational efficiency of global cyberspace governance, offering an effective solution to address the complex challenges inherent in managing today’s interconnected digital environment.
LiZZhangWYZhangHT, et al.Global Digital Compact: a Mechanism for the governance of online discriminatory and misleading content generation. Int J Hum Comput Interact2025; 41(2): 1381–1396.
2.
FinkelhorDKerryannWJonesL, et al.Youth internet safety education: aligning programs with the evidence base. Trauma Violence Abuse2021; 22(5): 1233–1247.
3.
WangXTLiuLChenBL, et al.The mediating effect of self-control on the relationship between exposure to violence and fighting among Chinese secondary school students. J Sch Violence2021; 21(1): 34–47.
4.
ChoJHCookTRagerS. Uncertainty-based false information propagation in social networks. ACM Trans. Soc. Comput2019; 2(2): 1–34.
5.
MoZYPanDQLiuH, et al.The problem and root cause analysis of false information in AIGC from the perspective of information quality. Libr Inf Knowl2023; 40(4): 32–40.
6.
LiMG. A secure transmission method for computer network data based on data encryption technology. China Comput & Commun2022; 34(15): 229–231.
7.
HuangJLWangJ. A protection method for communication data privacy based on unbalanced blockchain category networks. Telecom Power Technol2022; 39(22): 104–106.
8.
YazdeenAASubhiRMMohammed SadeeqM, et al.FPGA implementations for data encryption and decryption via concurrent and parallel computation: a review. Qubahan Academic Journal2021; 1(2): 8–16.
9.
GohdesAR. Repression technology: internet accessibility and state violence. Am J Pol Sci2020; 64(3): 488–503.
10.
GaudetteTRyanSVivekV. The role of the internet in facilitating violent extremism: insights from former right-wing extremists. Terrorism Polit Violence2022; 34(7): 1339–1356.
11.
BackeELPamelaLJenniferMS. Networked indiiduals, gendered violence: a literature review of cyberviolence. Violence Gend2018; 5(3): 135–146.
12.
MaswoodRSuparnaR. Social transmission of false memory in small groups and large networks. Top Cogn Sci2019; 11(4): 687–709.
13.
GhanemBPaoloRFranciscoR. An emotional analysis of false information in social media and news articles. ACM Trans Internet Technol2020; 20(2): 1–18.
14.
ZannettouSMichaelSJeremyB, et al.The web of false information: rumors, fake news, hoaxes, clickbait, and various other shenanigans. J Data Inf Qual2019; 11(3): 1–37.
15.
SunLYuanRWuLW, et al.Fighting false information from propagation process: a survey. ACM Comput Surv2023; 55(10): 1–38.
16.
VosoughiSDebRSinanA. The spread of true and false news online. Science2018; 359(6380): 1146–1151.
17.
BabcockMDavidMBKathleenMC. Different faces of false: the spread and curtailment of false information in the black panther twitter discussion. J Data Inf Qual2019; 11(4): 1–15.
18.
EntmanRMNikkiU. Framing in a fractured democracy: impacts of digital technology on ideology, power and cascading network activation. J Commun2018; 68(2): 298–308.
19.
MolinaMDShyamSLeT, et al.“Fake news” is not simply false information: a concept explication and taxonomy of online content. Am Behav Sci2021; 65(2): 180–212.
20.
AhmedMAl-SakibKP. False data injection attack (FDIA): an overview and new metrics for fair evaluation of its countermeasure. Complex Adapt Syst Model2020; 8(1): 1–14.
21.
SaravisthaDBSukadanaIKKadekDS. Urgency of contract model settings in the global digital market related to tourism business: a study on consumer protection and electronic information and transactions. Budap Int Res Crit Inst J2022; 5(1): 4549–4556.
22.
AljasirSAMaisoonOA. Cyberbullying and cybervictimization on digital media platforms: the role of demographic variables and parental mediation strategies. Humanit Soc Sci Commun2022; 9(1): 1–9.
23.
LiuY. Research on network data encryption system based on improved GANs algorithm. Int J Wireless Mobile Comput2023; 25(1): 68–75.
24.
KlijnEHIrisK. Governance and media attention: a research agenda about how media affect (network) governance processes. Perspect Public Manag Gov2018; 1(2): 103–113.
25.
GorodALHTiepN. A systemic approach to complex project management: integration of command‐and‐control and network governance. Syst Res Behav Sci2018; 35(6): 811–837.
26.
CraggTMcNamaraTDescubesI, et al.Manufacturing SMEs, network governance and global supply chains. J Small Bus Enterp Dev2020; 27(1): 130–147.
27.
FauziahZHaznahLXavierO, et al.Application of blockchain technology in smart contracts: a systematic literature review. APTISI Trans Technopreneursh2020; 2(2): 160–166.
28.
SavantVBRupaliDK. A review on network security and cryptography. Res J Eng Technol2021; 12(4): 110–114.
29.
LinSYZhangLLiJ, et al.A survey of application research based on blockchain smart contract. Wirel Netw2022; 28(2): 635–690.
30.
BranchJ. What’s in a name? Metaphors and cybersecurity. Int Organ2021; 75(1): 39–70.
31.
CavetyMDEgloffFJ. The politics of cybersecurity: balancing different roles of the state. St Antony's Int Rev2019; 15(1): 37–57.
32.
HartmannCCCarmenateJ. Academic research on the role of corporate governance and IT expertise in addressing cybersecurity breaches: implications for practice, policy, and research. Curr. Issues Auditing2021; 15(2): 9–23.
33.
HurelLMLobatoLC. Unpacking cyber norms: private companies as norm entrepreneurs. J. Cyber Policy2018; 3(1): 61–76.
34.
StevensC. Assembling cybersecurity: the politics and materiality of technical malware reports and the case of Stuxnet. Contemp Secur Policy2020; 41(1): 129–152.
35.
CalliessCBaumgartenA. Cybersecurity in the EU the example of the financial sector: a legal perspective. Ger. Law J2020; 21(6): 1149–1179.
