NSA to Become Government Net 'Traffic Cop?'

OriginalArlen writes "The NSA may be appointed 'Internet traffic cop', overseeing data sharing among US government agencies for Homeland Security, according to an A.P. report on SecurityFocus. Apparently the aim is to improve security of all government networks." This would seem to follow in the footsteps of creating the Department of Homeland Security, since the aim is to enable better sharing of data between government institutions.

Comments

Interesting Statistic

[bigtallmofo]

If the NSA becomes the "Internet Traffic Cop", can it be said that 99.9% of the NSA's budget is devoted to pornography?

NSA == Spy && !SecurityInforcer

[Space_Soldier]

"Apparently the aim is to improve security of all government networks." That does not make sense; is not the job of the NSA to brake security of any network in order to easedrop on the conversations? It is a spy agency, not a security agency.

Re:NSA == Spy && !SecurityInforcer

[qbzzt]

That does not make sense; is not the job of the NSA to brake security of any network in order to easedrop on the conversations? It is a spy agency, not a security agency.

The assumption is that a spy agency will have a good idea what kind of holes would allow other spy agencies to break in. Not a bad idea, IMAO.

Re:NSA == Spy && !SecurityInforcer

[PornMaster]

I don't know if you remember the Clipper Chip initiative from the Clinton Administration -- '93/'94, but the NSA was pushing to get a key-escrow encryption chip in production and mandated for use when communicating sensitive data with the Feds.

Of course, nobody outside the US would use it, since the gov't would keep a backdoor key...

Here's some info from NIST about it that plainly talks about the NSA's involvement.

erm...

[REBloomfield]

I can't read the article, as my wonderful UK Government overseers have deemed it bad enough to go on the proxy blacklist, but... how is policing Government networks the same as policing the entire Internet???

Well hey...

[EvilTwinSkippy]

The best cops are the ones you don't know are there.

Ambiguous

[Nastard]

After reading TFA, I'm a little confused. From what I gathered, they won't be "traffic cops" so much network guards slash data escorts. It seems to me that "traffic cops" is misleading, since it implies that they'll have some sort of authority over personal data as well.

Or perhaps I read it wrong, and they'll be setting up speed traps and beating ethnic people.

My Rights Online?

[yotto]

How does this affect MRO? They're not looking at my traffic, impeding my traffic, or even thinking about my traffic. They're routing government traffic.

And they're a government agency. /confused.

Oh that.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's hyperbole.

It's how we have debates over here in America. First we take out the facts. Look at them. Create the most extreme, yet superficially similar argument from them. Then we shoot them in the head, and bury them in a shallow grave. If anyone dares to impugn our integrity we first call them a "name-caller" but in much less flattering terms, and cite the fact that they are thus as proof of their unreasonable bias. If that doesn't work, we turn of their mic while our friends yell at them until we throw to commercial.

Why do we behave in such a course, pointless and ignorant manner? A good question. I'm glad you asked it. We do it for the children. Now I've really got to take a break.

Can't think of a better entity for the job

[ScentCone]

Virtually every government agency is subject to evolution in their mission, especially when we experience a fundamental change in the technological landscape. The NSA probably has more experience, nuts-and-bolts-wise, with this subject than any other collection of humans on the planet. No question they've got the chops, but the budget warfare will be a bloody one, just like it was with the TSA or is shaping up to be on things like border crossing security or container shipment inspection. Compared to years past, these changes are happening very, very quickly. At least the NSA won't have to run out and figure out what sort of people to hire, or invent new tools to understand their mission in this case. It's more a matter of scale, and of getting, say, the IT guys at the Commerce Department to understand their nerdy new friends.

Government networks

[Anonymous Coward]

This has nothing to do with the Internet. Government networks are separated from the Internet by an air gap. Unless you have physical access to a terminal (behind the nice guys with automatic weapons who check your credentials, at least where I worked), you can't get on SIPRNet or JWICS.

I'm all for NSA making these classified networks more secure.

Re:DHS is redundant

[Erwos]

"I never could come to grips with creating a Department of Homeland Security when we already had a National Security Agency."

The National Security Agency's mandate is nothing at all like DHS's. Not even similar. If you thought about this for three seconds more, you would have also realized that NSA cannot, by law, conduct surveillance on US citizens or on US territory. This would prevent them from doing criminal investigations of any sort, wouldn't it?

This is basically akin to asking why we need the FBI when we have the CIA. The organizations have the same general goal (protect the citizens of the United States), but are supposed to be doing two entirely different things.

-Erwos

Re:Anybody want to guess?

[digitalchinky]

The 'effort' will cost virtually nothing more than one of the front end operators tuning up a modem somewhere, or adding a couple extra patches to the spiderweb...

There's a logical reason for doing this - NSA has people already trained, systems already in place, will not cost the tax payer too much extra cash.

DSD is going in a similar direction - no matter how much the public like to jump up and down about it - it's the way of the future. Ok, so ASIO is meant to deal with domestic tapping, but has a very 'strong' history of 'borrowing' DSD personnel for the technical aspects - why 'not' get DSD to do it?

Simplification basically is the reason - no conspiracy theories, it just makes sense. If you are 'shocked' at this move, you are essentially blind to things that have been going on since the 'internet' started.

Re:Better sharing of data isn't what's needed...

[Jim_Maryland]

While the information made it to decision makers in some form, acting on every threat would be impractical. How many other reports did decision makers get that turned out to be invalid? Hind sight is always much clearer.

As for data sharing, the problem isn't technical rather it's a policy issue. "It's reorganizing leadership." - Leadership can be blamed, but it's not only at the top level as your statement about "The president did nothing about it." indicates. Each agency tends to consider their "secrets" to be more important than other agencies "secrets". Many people are responsible at various levels in the intelligence gathering process and placing blame on a single person, the president in your case, is not realistic. Many of the policies to protect information have been in place for quite a bit of time. DHS has the task of breaking down these barriers and will hopefully lead to better communication, but even with that, determining which threats are truly credible will still be a judgement call at various levels.

Re:DHS is redundant

[Wyatt Earp]

That's because you don't understand what NSA does.

"The National Security Agency (NSA) is a United States government agency responsible for both the collection and analysis of message communications, and for the security of government communications against similar agencies elsewhere. It is a part of the Department of Defense. Its eavesdropping brief includes radio broadcasting, both from organizations and individuals, the Internet, and other intercepted forms of communication, especially confidential communications. Its secure communications brief includes military, diplomatic, and all other sensitive, confidential or secret government communications."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA

"The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a Cabinet department of the federal government of the United States that is concerned with protecting the American homeland and the safety of American citizens. This department was created primarily from a conglomeration of existing federal agencies in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Depar tm ent_of_Homeland_Security

Office of the Secretary
Directorate of Border and Transportation Security
Transportation Security Administration
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Resonse
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Directorate of Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection
National Cyber Security Division
Directorate of Science and Technology
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
U.S. Coast Guard
U.S. Secret Service

Re:The NSA?

[nelsonal]

If you want to learn more about the NSA and you find yourself in the Baltimore-Washington corridor, I whole heartedly reccomend going to check out the national cryptological museum which has several excellent exhibits regarding the history of codes used by countries (they have an enigma or purple and a Cray which is more than I've ever seen in other museums).

Hey...

[Greyfox]

If it means that the black helecopters abduct those fuckers who keep sending me Nigerian E-Mail scams and phishing scams, I'm all for it. They could stash them in the cell next to Manuel Noriega. Whatever happened to ol' Manuel anyway? Did he ever even get a trial? Is that a black helecopter? Ow! Hey quit it! #^!#@!~ [NO CARRIER]