Slashdot Mirror
New Bill Could Shift Federal Cybersecurity Work From DHS To White House
CNet reports on legislation currently being drafted that would transfer federal cybersecurity responsibilities away from the Department of Homeland Security. Instead, they would fall under the authority of the Executive Office of the President, creating an Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor. A tech commission recommended relieving the DHS of cybersecurity responsibilities late last year, saying it simply wasn't prepared to deal with organized online threats. More recently, the director of the DHS's National Cybersecurity Center resigned, citing interference from the NSA. The new legislation would "put the White House National Cybersecurity Advisor in charge of coordinating cyber efforts within the intelligence community and within civilian agencies, as well as coordinating the public sector's cooperation with the private sector. The advisor would have the authority to disconnect from the Internet any federal infrastructure networks — or other networks deemed to be 'critical' — if found to be at risk of a cyberattack. The private sector will certainly speak out if this provision is included in the final draft of the bill, a representative of the technology industry who spoke on condition of anonymity said."
Great, so instead of the DHS being the only great fear monger, we now are going to create a new office to replicate it? How is DHS not the most logical place for cybersecurity? Intelligence is there, let THEM act on it. No need to increase the size of the government and have some other moron (who probably didnt pay his taxes) waiving his arms around at a puff of smoke...
-1: Obamahater
Warning: Corny karma killing post above.
Antivirus software I can believe in!
It's good to see that the White House thinks cyber security is important enough to move it into the Whitehouse, where they will be closer to the President and better prepared for power struggles. On the other, wasn't DHS supposed to cut through all the bullshit of turf wars to make us secure, or at least more so? If they can't do so, what justifies the new cabinet position and the accompanying increase in government size?
http://bgcommonsense.blogspot.com
"The adviser would have the authority to disconnect from the Internet any federal infrastructure networks -- or other networks deemed to be 'critical' -- if found to be at risk of a cyberattack."
Looks like the entire US government is going offline soon.
If I didn't have absolutely NOTHING to do, I wouldn't be here.
How about we abolish the DHS altogether? What an expensive boondoggle it turned out to be. The worst part is that it got formed because the various intelligence agencies were engaged in turf wars and refusing to share info on possible threats to the US. The solution? Create another monster agency. Sigh.
When all else fails, run.
You know, the framers of the constitution wanted inefficiency to be built into the government, it prevented it from being 'too good' at robbing citizens of our rights before we knew it was happening.
This whole administration is dangerous.
I think the current cyber security guy quit for a number of reasons, not the least of which was the NSA - he also couldn't get much support from his own team in DHS. For those who actually swim in those waters, everyone major three letter government agency has their own 'cyber taskforce'. And they'll be dammned if they're going to share or collaborate any of their work with others - just mention the word 'cyber', and congress will start dumping a ton of funding on you. You start taking that away, and suddenly things get personal - now you're talking cash, and you always want more funding. It's also aggravated by mission creep - suddenly another three letter agency adopts a mission similar to yours, but this is YOUR mission, you're the experts, everyone else can go hang. Most agencies will not bow to another no matter how the executive office structures it, plain and simple. While I think that the executive office taking the lead role is probably a sound move, a part of me wonders if it's just more bureaucratic shuffling that achieves nothing.
I bring nothing to the table.
First, DHS is staffed by total incompetents. I used to work with two of their original top ppl. They were a group that was loyal to W and the neo-cons first, then loyal to the corp, finally, loyal the nation. Total idiots.
Second, NSA was suppose to have this. It is their job to protect our electronic frontier. They were doing a good job of it (QUIETLY), until DHS jumped in. And as to the interference, it was a good thing. DHS was back to trying to push America on one standard.
Finally, I am not convinced that moving this into the white house is a good thing. For our operations to be protected, it is going to require a NONE POLITICAL GROUP. NSA is OVERALL A-political. The white house by definition is political. Even if Obama is moderate (not sure that he is), and tries to be none political, it is certain that everyone around him IS political.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Isn't the DHS within the Executive branch anyway? They do what the President tells them. What difference does it make if it's physically there inside the white house.
I'm a 2000 man.
I'm no constitutional scholar, but I suspect that inefficiency was meant to be applied to Congress, not to the Executive Branch (which DHS, CIA, NSA and other TLAs are part of). The inefficiency was meant to prevent bogus laws from making it on the books. (you can argue that the inefficiency fails at this, but that was its purpose), not to prevent gov't from enforcing the laws it does have.
Practice Kind Randomness and Beautiful Acts of Nonsense.
This whole administration is dangerous.
I was not aware that the administration was responsible for Congress' proposed legislation or a commission's report. Let's at least wait until the White House has issued some sort of statement before condemning Obama over this.
Clearly this administration has no regard for the Constitution and the fact that this sort of power-grab is precisely why the branches of government where created the way they were. The fact that this cybersecurity department would report to the executive branch means that it doesn't report to Congress aka The People. Congress could demand transparency all they want and the Office of the President can tell them to go pound sand...once the department is created. Doing things under the guise of FUD and then absolving themselves of any responsibility is the hallmark of this administration. Notice I didn't say Obama. IMHO, he's not savvy enough to pull this stuff off on his own. IMHO, the real power lies behind the throne.
Every four to eight years, we will be replacing all the networking equipment, even the cables, with parts from, coincidentally, the company that donated the most to the President's campaign.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.