  Security and safety are intertwined concepts in the world of computing. In
recent years, the terms "sustainable security" and "sustainable safety" came
into fashion and are being used referring to a variety of systems properties
ranging from efficiency to profitability, and sometimes meaning that a product
or service is good for people and planet. This leads to confusing perceptions
of products where customers might expect a sustainable product to be developed
without child labour, while the producer uses the term to signify that their
new product uses marginally less power than the previous generation of that
products. Even in research on sustainably safe and secure ICT, these different
notions of terminology are prevalent. As researchers we often work towards
optimising our subject of study towards one specific sustainability metric -
let's say energy consumption - while being blissfully unaware of, e.g., social
impacts, life-cycle impacts, or rebound effects of such optimisations.
  In this paper I dissect the idea of sustainable safety and security, starting
from the questions of what we want to sustain, and for whom we want to sustain
it. I believe that a general "people and planet" answer is inadequate here
because this form of sustainability cannot be the property of a single industry
sector but must be addressed by society as a whole. However, with sufficient
understanding of life-cycle impacts we may very well be able to devise research
and development efforts, and inform decision making processes towards the use
of integrated safety and security solutions that help us to address societal
challenges in the context of the climate and ecological crises, and that are
aligned with concepts such as intersectionality and climate justice. Of course,
these solutions can only be effective if they are embedded in societal and
economic change towards more frugal uses of data and ICT.
