i.e freedom of movement, the threat of use of viruses as a weapon. That threat is worse than use of a nuclear bomb. The effects of the use of a mild virus have now been proven. A small rogue state can easily and covertly develop a more deadly virus which can easily be deployed against an enemy. You could have mass death before you know whats even hit you
. The genie is out the bottle now.
I see the future of threats as more targeted and very very specific - something like Stuxnet against Iran's nuclear power plant. Even an atomic bomb is very targeted. Even if you are a rogue state, there is very little logic in developing a deadly virus that can spread uncontrollably, mutate and infect the entire population. Then of course some regimes do not use logic in their thinking.
Right now I'm worried about more obvious consequences. The clear analogy is with 9/11 - it allowed the PATRIOT Act (aka "turning citizens into suspects since 2001") in the US. USA had lots of freedom, personal privacy but in the past 19 years that definitely changed. Airport controls, indefinite detentions, warrantless home searches, NSA eavesdropping and secret programs, searching email and financial information without court order, mass phone data collection, cash confiscation, civil asset forfeiture...
All these things would be unimaginable in such a country but if you scare people enough with terrorism, they won't protest.
I can imagine new laws in countries where the virus is spreading now, especially Europe, SE Asia - for example unlimited and warrantless cell phone tracking, border control questionnaires (where have you been, who did you meet, why are you travelling), bullying of residents who are citizens of another country etc etc.