Slashdot Mirror
Cyber-Security Czar To Be Named
The Washington Post and everybody else is reporting that on Tuesday President Obama will name Howard A. Schmidt as cyber-security czar. Schmidt was an advisor to President Bush on cyber-security matters. The Post rehearses the reasons why the Obama administration has had difficulty in finding someone for the post, and notes that the turf battles did not start in this administration: "Schmidt was chosen after a long process in which dozens of people were sounded out. Many declined the post, largely out of concern that the job conferred much responsibility with little true authority, some of them said. Meanwhile, the cybersecurity chief at the National Security Council, Christopher Painter, has served as the de facto coordinator, trying to push ahead the 60-day cyberspace policy review plan unveiled by Obama in May. That plan's formulation was led by Melissa Hathaway, who resigned in frustration in August after delays in naming a cyber-coordinator. She had been a contender for the position... Schmidt served as special adviser for cyberspace security from 2001 to 2003 and shepherded the National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace, a plan that then was largely ignored. He left that job also frustrated, colleagues said."
Wow, I didn't realize Hathaway had resigned.. but I guess that's why she didn't get the job, eh? I don't think this is the last resignation we'll see in the cyber security area.
Hathaway seemed like she was really the best pick for the job, especially considering the 60 day cyberspace policy review thing she did. Not that I read through the entire thing, but she made some pretty interesting suggestions. For instance, she talked about how cyber security is not something that can just be centrally managed on a national level and then applied across different agencies. Each agency has to be forced to create a good information security culture for themselves (this is already happening, to an extent).
The National Cyber Security Division within Homeland Security has been trying to do this. They have neither the resources, nor the authority to do this, however.. even though it's part of what their mission is. As a result, they've had some extreme issue when it comes to leadership, with almost no one lasting more than a year or so there without resigning.
I wouldn't be surprised if I saw Mr. Schmidt resigning at some point, but hopefully having an experienced advisor with the Presidents ear will move cyber security up enough in the list of priorities so that people aren't scared just to take the job in first place.
Funny, they had to give the job back to the last guy who had it because no one else would take it. I wouldn't take it either, because that guy is going to get strung up by the angry mob when the inevitable Chinese cyber-strike occurs.
I've met Howard Schmidt several times at security events, and I think he's best suited for writing articles for the trade mags and speaking on the lecture circuit than he is for real information security work. Hre just strikes me as nothing more than a charlatan.
It's hard to meet the guy and come away liking him too, his ego fills the room, and since he's an "honorary" professor at several colleges with security initiatives, he inists on everyone calling him "professor schmidt." Reminds me of the maestro from "Seinfeld."
I don't know how he could be taken seriously after he did an infomercial on youtube for his alma matta, the University of Phoenix: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ep2ykil-cmU
Don't let Obama off easy on the "turf wars" thing. He specifically promised multiple times in the campaign to hire a security czar who would report directly to him and have real authority.
For months nobody would accept this position because it was set to report both to the National Security Council and National Economic Council and have no budgetary authority. Now it seems that he will report only to the National Security Council, but this still breaks Obama's promise, although this is hardly the only time he tossed aside a campaign promise.
What is the difference the taxpayer is going to be paying for all of it anyway. Maybe the next time you get your paycheck, why don't you look at the taxes the government is taking from you. One of those is FICA.. You will see it. We already cover these people and now under the OBAMANATION we get to subsidize them even more. You are wrong the freedom from responsibility rests with these government tit suckers. While we (the taxpayer) continue to shoulder the load and have the responsibility of paying more.
if you buy health insurance right now, it continues to climb in price like no tomorrow, covers less and less every day, all to support a bloated inefficient system of companies competing to deny you coverage. under a single payer system, even if the government was 10x more inefficient and bureaucratic, it would still be cheaper, and you would be paying for a healthcare entity whose mandate is to take care of YOU, not some fucking stockholder
universal health care coverage is so fucking obviously superior to what we have now, i can only conclude morons and assholes who defy it do so only out of some alien atavistic hatred for simple, obvious progress
are you like those townhall retards who stand up and shout "big government, keep your socialist hands off my medicare!" (snicker)
you're going to PAY for healthcare one way or another genius. the current way you pay for it sucks FAR FAR WORSE than a government run system could ever be. try to understand the fucking obvious someday
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Why do yuo think were in a recessoin and headed towwards a global crash??
Umm... because unfettered market was allowed to play hazard games with our economy? Because people were in charge whose primary interest was to fill their own pockets no matter what happens to the whole economy and we let it happen due to no laws regulating what they can or cannot do?
I didn't vote for greedy bankers tossing our economy in favor of their own wallets but guess what: You don't get to elect them!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.