Slashdot Mirror
NSA Tasked With 'Policing' Government Networks
Novus Ordo Seclorum writes "The NSA has a new assignment. No longer merely responsible for signals intelligence, the NSA now has the task of defending against cyber attacks on government and private networks. 'The plan calls for the NSA to work with the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies to monitor such networks to prevent unauthorized intrusion, according to those with knowledge of what is known internally as the 'Cyber Initiative.' Details of the project are highly classified. Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, a former NSA chief, is coordinating the initiative. It will be run by the Department of Homeland Security, which has primary responsibility for protecting domestic infrastructure, including the Internet, current and former officials said. At the outset, up to 2,000 people -- from the Department of Homeland Security, the NSA and other agencies -- could be assigned to the initiative, said a senior intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity.'"
I would hope important government networks would not be on their own network and thus not susceptible to "cyber" attacks.
Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
not to mention the litteny of local and state police departments.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
The FBI is the only police department, at least at this point. The FBI is the federal government's police. Most policing is done at the city or county level, some at the state level. However for crimes that span states, crimes on federal land/property, crimes against the federal government and so on there is the federal police, the FBI. The NSA and CIA are not police agencies, they are spy agencies. The CIA is human intelligence, the NSA is signals intelligence. What that means is the CIA is all about getting information from people, be it by attempting to place spys or turning other agents or whatever. The NSA is all about getting information electronically, by wiretapping, listening in on radio waves, and so on.
The reason to have these separate is in part because it is very different kind of jobs, but also to try and prevent abuses. In theory (though we've seen that it isn't obeyed) the CIA and NSA don't do domestic operations. They are for spying on foreign powers, not US citizens. By maintaining an organizational divide it helps keep abuses down.
The DHS is a good idea at the high levels in an amazingly fucked up and retarded implementation. The idea is that the NSA and CIA often know things that the FBI doesn't, and vice versa. This is not to mention other intelligence agencies and so on. So often, everyone has a piece of the picture, but nobody can see the whole thing. This was the case with the time leading up to 9/11. Various groups knew pieces, but nothing solid. So the idea is DHS helps get the information collected and formed in to a solid picture. They get facts from all groups, NSA, CIA, FBI, customs, state and local cops and so on, and to then be able to coordinate action.
In reality they are a big waste of time and money that does nothing useful.
But really we want intelligence and police to be separate and we also want the police broken down in terms of power. Having one big federal police force would be problematic. At least with local policing voters can, in theory, hold their police more accountable. They have a say in how local issues are handled. Also, laws differ from state to state. What is true in one state is not true in all of them. Law enforcement needs to be segmented to take that in to account.
As a comparison look to Europe. There you are talking about an area of similar size and population (similar as in the same basic level, not as in equality). While there are European wide things like Interpol, each nation has it's own police, and often subdivisions below that. Also those police forces are usually separate from intelligence forces.
The US really isn't different in that regard, it is just a very large nation. A great many nations are smaller than a number of US states.
The NSA has their own Linux distro, specially hardened for security.
:-)
Let's hope they start deploying it more widely...
No sig today...
... Details of the project are highly classified. But not secret enough to issue a press release about it?Take Nobody's Word For It.
I live in england, my school monitors my internet use, has over 30 surveillance cameras, including in our study area, has finger print activated doors and has my finger prints on file.
America's got nothing on us, don't worry, I'm leaving my school ASAP, insisting they delete all the information and if they don't provide me with satisfactory use they have I'll sue them.
2008 PRNewsWire - Today Symantec and the NSA announce a merger. The NSA will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Symantec Corp. In exchange, Symantec will issue 100,000 shares of common stock to each member of Congress.
Coming soon to a network near you - NortonNSA!
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
I know NSA is the bad guy of the week, but this doesn't really sound like a "new responsibility" to me. NSA has, almost from the beginning, been composed of the Signals Intelligence and the Information Assurance Directorate, which does exactly what this article is talking about, and has for quite some time now.
This actually makes some sense. NSA has two main divisions - Signals Intelligence, which collects information, and Information Assurance, which tries to protect US information. Traditionally, these were the codebreaking and codemaking sides of the agency.
It's a boost for NSA Secure Linux. The real intent of NSA Secure Linux, by the way, was not to plug holes in Linux. It was to get something that enforced mandatory security out into the community, so that that applications would be converted to run under stricter rules. For example, a browser should be running as several components, some of which are secure but dumb and some of which are insecure but untrusted. Few application developers picked up on this. That part didn't get enough community attention.
NSA takes a quite different view of computer security than the "security industry". They're less concerned about annoying high volume attacks, and more concerned about quiet, focused attacks aimed at specific targets. They're also very interested in who's behind the attack, and will devote collection resources to finding out more about the attackers.
This last may give some attackers something to worry about.
Can we say "traffic whoring", children? I knew we could.