Buy Viagra Without Prescription - Trusted Online Pharmacy

Monday the House Homeland Security released a new GAO study: Key Private and Public Cyber Expectations Need to be Consistently Addressed. The Government Accountability Office reports that the private sector is disappointed in the public sector and the reverse is also true.  From the report:

Private sector stakeholders reported that they expect their federal partners to provide usable, timely, and actionable cyber threat information and alerts; access to sensitive or classified information; a secure mechanism for sharing information; security clearances; and a single centralized government cybersecurity organization to coordinate government efforts. However, according to private sector stakeholders, federal partners are not consistently meeting these expectations... 

 

Public sector council officials stated that improvements could be made to the partnership, including improving private sector sharing of sensitive information. Some private sector stakeholders do not want to share their proprietary information with the federal government for fear of public disclosure and potential loss of market share, among other reasons.

 

Without improvements in meeting private and public sector expectations, the partnerships will remain less than optimal, and there is a risk that owners of critical infrastructure will not have the information necessary to thwart cyber attacks that could have catastrophic effects on our nation’s cyber-reliant critical infrastructure.

Siobhan Gorman of the Wall Street Journal reported Buy cheap sildenafil citrate, yesterday that the National Security Agency (NSA) is developing a cybersecurity program entitled "Perfect Citizen" that would "rely on a set of sensors deployed in computer networks for critical infrastructure that would be triggered by unusual activity suggesting an impending cyber attack, though it wouldn't persistently monitor the whole system." The purpose of the program would be to "detect cyber assaults on private companies and government agencies running such critical infrastructure as the electricity grid and nuclear-power plants."

Raytheon allegedly won a $100 million contract for the first phase of the project, which is part of the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI) rolled out in January 2008 by President George W. Bush in the classified National Security Presidential Directive 54/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 23 (NSPD-54/ HSPD-23).  President Obama announced in May 2009 as part of the current Administration's Cyberspace Policy Review that elements of the CNCI would continue as part of an increased effort to build our nation's cybersecurity strengths.

NSA confirmed late Thursday/early this morning that Perfect Citizen is, indeed, a real program but took issue with the Wall Street Journal's portrayal, women use cialis. In a statement the agency said "Perfect Citizen is purely a vulnerabilities-assessment and capabilities-development contract. This is a research and engineering effort. There is no monitoring activity involved, and no sensors are employed in this endeavor ....Specifically, it does not involve the monitoring of communications or placement of sensors on utility company systems."  The NSA went on to say that"this contract provides a set of technical solutions that help the National Security Agency better understand the threats to national security networks, which is a critical part of NSA's mission of defending the nation."

Since Gorman's story on Perfect Citizen yesterday, there has been a flurry of Internet activity asking several questions, all of which mirror the larger issues facing the federal government as it tries to tackle cybersecurity.  Those questions are:

1. How much should the federal government be intervening in the private sector's efforts to protect critical infrastructure assets that are not owned by the United States?


2. If there should be intervention, how do we address privacy concerns and fears of Big Brother intervention?


3. Is the NSA (or any of the three letter classified agencies) the proper place for housing such a program?

The questions are intertwined but are not new -- the government has struggled with them since the mid-90s when President Bill Clinton announced the first large-scale public efforts to develop public-private partnerships to address critical infrastructure and cybersecurity.   How the Obama Administration chooses to address these three questions going forward will help define the future of cybersecurity for citizens, stakeholders, contractors, the federal government, and our international partners, buy cheap sildenafil citrate.

How much should the federal government be intervening in the private sector's efforts to protect critical infrastructure assets that are not owned by the United States?

Interestingly, Buying viagra without perscription, this is objective # 12 of 12 in the CNCI, according to documents released by President Obama last year.  According to the White House National Security Council's website describing the program, that objective is as follows:

Initiative #12. Define the Federal role for extending cybersecurity into critical infrastructure domains. The U.S. Government depends on a variety of privately owned and operated critical infrastructures to carry out the public’s business, sildenafil citrate price. In turn, these critical infrastructures rely on the efficient operation of information systems and networks that are vulnerable to malicious cyber threats. Buy cheap sildenafil citrate, This Initiative builds on the existing and ongoing partnership between the Federal Government and the public and private sector owners and operators of Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources (CIKR). The Department of Homeland Security and its private-sector partners have developed a plan of shared action with an aggressive series of milestones and activities. Cyalis levitra sales viagra, It includes both short-term and long-term recommendations, specifically incorporating and leveraging previous accomplishments and activities that are already underway. It addresses security and information assurance efforts across the cyber infrastructure to increase resiliency and operational capabilities throughout the CIKR sectors. It includes a focus on public-private sharing of information regarding cyber threats and incidents in both government and CIKR.

This objective, as stated, canada online pharmacy tadalafil, meshes with findings of the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection, created by President Clinton in 1996, in its report Critical Foundations, Viagra in canada pfizer, Protecting America's Infrastructures.  In its 1997 report, the Commission found:

The quickest and most effective way to achieve a much higher level of protection from cyber threats is a strategy of cooperation and information sharing based on partnerships among the infrastructure owners and operators and appropriate government agencies.

To facilitate this new relationship between government and industry, new mechanisms will be needed, including sector “clearing houses” to provide the focus for industry cooperation and information sharing; a council of industry CEOs, representatives of state and local government, cialis canadian scam, and Cabinet secretaries to provide policy advice and implementation commitment; a real-time capability for attack warning; and a top-level policy making office in the White House.

...

Another area where government must lead is in research and development, buy cheap sildenafil citrate. Some of the basic technology and tools needed to provide improved infrastructure protection already exist, but need to be widely employed. Herbal cialis, However, there is a need for additional technology with which to protect our essential systems. We have, therefore, recommended a program of research and development focused on those needed capabilities.

It is eerie how little the rhetoric, canada cheap tadalafil, problems, and solutions on cybersecurity has changed in 13 years, especially given the leaps and bounds we have seen on the technology front - from broadband to smartgrids to wireless to social networks.  The 1997 report would be one of a handful to emerge from the government, Cheap pill tadalafil, all touting the same action items.  In addition, several federal entities - many with acronyms as names - emerged over the years, from the Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office (CIAO) at the Department of Commerce to the National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) at the FBI to the National Cyber Security Division (NCSD) at the Department of Homeland Security.

We also saw directives offered by both Presidents Clinton and Bush to further explain the complex relationship between the government and the private sector in protecting critical infrastructures.  PDD 63, released in May 1998, get tadalafil fast, established national policy on necessary measures to eliminate significant vulnerabilities to physical and cyber attacks on U.S. Buy cheap sildenafil citrate, critical infrastructures, including U.S. cyber systems.  HSPD-7, released in December 2003, Where to get cialis, superseded PDD-63, and focused on establishing a national policy for Federal departments and agencies to identify and prioritize U.S. critical infrastructure and key resources and to protect them from terrorist attacks.

Since Perfect Citizen is focused on the energy sector, it is worth noting that the 1997 Critical Infrastructure report did specifically address the vulnerabilities and threats of the energy sector in one of its chapters.  Its concluding findings were:

1. The authorities and responsibilities for energy infrastructure assurance in the federal
   government need to be clarified, discount cialis.
   


2. The respective responsibilities of government and private sector for infrastructure assurance are not clearly understood.
   


3. Improved sharing of threat information and “indications and warning” (I&W) information is needed, buy cheap sildenafil citrate. Improved sharing of industry experience is needed (e.g., a fully populated cyber intrusion database).


4. More training and awareness in infrastructure assurance is needed, Natural viagra, focusing on risk management, vulnerabilities, performance testing, and cyber security.


5. Infrastructure assurance technology advancements could add significantly to the overall protection of industry assets.


6. Adopting uniform physical and cyber security guidelines, standards or best practices would enhance protection.

Interesting, how do you use cialis, the government had already been looking at energy sector vulnerabilities before the Commission was even formed.  In the late 80s, the House Energy & Commerce and Senate Government Affairs Committees held hearings and requested an assessment from the then-existing Office of Technology Assessment on the vulnerabilities of the grid. OTA released a report in 1990 entitled  “Physical Vulnerability of Electric Systems to Natural Disasters and Sabotage.”  The report describes the various agencies involved in protecting electric systems, Acheter en ligne viagra, from the National Security Council to the Federal Emergency Management Agency to the Department of Defense to the FBI, and includes the conclusion that "[t]he appropriate level of government intervention is a matter of value judgment and opinion. The level of threat, both sabotage and natural disaster, cannot be quantified, buy discount sildenafil citrate online, and the costs of a major outage are highly dependent on the exact nature of the outage."

So what can be concluded from these efforts?  Maybe the OTA report is right - government intervention/involvement in private sector efforts in this area is really a value judgment call where we will see the right mix when we see it.  There is no easy answer though it is clear that it has to be a joint effort if we are going to protect our critical infrastructures such as the electric grid, nuclear plants, and oil pipelines.  Attention should be focused on specific solutions that can harden our systems and advance our efforts beyond policy, Link online suggest cialis, partnerships, and threatened mandates.

If there should be intervention, how do we address privacy concerns and fears of Big Brother intervention?

Privacy concerns relating to how the federal government works with the private sector on monitoring critical systems are also not new.  Each time the government creates a cybersecurity program, concerns are raised - some rightly, some not - on what are we doing on the privacy front, cheap tadalafil online.

In the late 90s/early 2000s, the FBI came under fire for its unfortunately named program "Carnivore," which was designed to monitor email and electronic communications through the use of customized packet sniffers.  The name was quickly changed to DCS1000 (despite some   calls for it to be renamed "Fluffy Bunny") but the program never quite survived the privacy uproar that followed it. Buy cheap sildenafil citrate, Currently, the Einstein (1,2, 3) programs that make up part of the CNCI effort remain under fire from privacy and civil liberties advocates because they involve deep packet inspections and scanning of communications for malicious code before they attack government systems.  Einstein 1 and 2 have been examined in great detail and have Privacy Impact Assessments available.  Einstein 3, which has yet to be rolled out fully, has created the most controversy as it would allegedly preempt strikes before they happen by sharing information with the NSA (a simplistic description that I'm sure has many techies rolling their eyes). Can tadalafil be used by women, The concern for many privacy and civil liberties advocates on this front are two-fold. First, there is a general concern that NSA's involvement in what many deem a civilian effort, especially in light of NSA's surveillance and intelligence gathering missions, would go beyond protecting to  actively intruding on citizen's privacy and activities.  Second, cialis dosage, to the degree there is discussion about extending Einstein and other programs into the private sector, there is concern about government involvement in such efforts, especially in light of concerns over NSA involvement and use of its "Tutelage" technology developed for screening cybersecurity networks. 

We can expect the same concerns raised by Einstein 3 to be raised with Perfect Citizen.  The fact that private sector systems are the focal point of the effort, Sildenafil citrate ingredients, something that most of the CNCI has avoided by focusing government systems, may raise further questions as experts try to parse out what really is going on with Perfect Citizen.  Since it is a classified program, much of the discussion will focus on speculation and rumors, making the privacy concerns more difficult to discern.  NSA's involvement will only magnify those concerns.  It is hard to address concerns for problems that are only speculative and so dependent on "trust" but with little way to "verify" for privacy advocates.

Is the NSA (or any of the three letter classified agencies) the proper place for housing such a program?

Before answering this question, generic viagra in mexico, it is worth exploring whether the privacy issues raised in question 2 would go away if NSA was not involved in Perfect Citizen.   My assessment is that they would not as DHS has had a number of programs come under privacy scrutiny and much of the proposed activity would need to be classified to achieve its goals and be successful.  The protection of industry information would also have to be adequately addressed.

So putting those concerns aside,  should DHS or NSA be leading this effort?  It is hard to understand exactly what role NSA is playing in this effort or why, Cheap sildenafil citrate from uk, according to media reports, it is doing outreach to utilities.  Especially confusing is the fact that if you look at Objective #12 under the CNCI (see above), DHS has the lead on the effort to extend government efforts to the private sector and has done extensive work, along with the Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, on the various subsectors within the energy sector on protecting their systems.

Also unclear is how the NSA's lead (if it is indeed leading) on Perfect Citizen meshes with the Office of Management and Budget's Memorandum released earlier this week, where to get tadalafil, on July 6th, entitled Clarifying Cybersecurity Responsibilities and Activities of the Executive Office of the President and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

That memorandum clearly states:

Under various national security and homeland security Presidential directives, and pursuant to its statutory authorities, DHS oversees critical infrastructure protection, operates the United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT), oversees implementation of the Trusted Internet Connection initiative, and takes other actions to help secure both the Federal civilian government systems and the private sector.

Maybe future revelations about Perfect Citizen will reveal DHS's role in the program and make clearer how NSA is engaging with the energy sector on what the agency is calling a "research and development" program.  Given the complexities involved with cybersecurity, if NSA has technology that is useful that has been developed on "the other side," shouldn't it be working with DHS and other civilian agencies to test it and determine its applicability in civilian government and private sector systems.

If it does not have the technology but is contracting with outside entities to develop it purely for civilian purposes, then that would seemingly contradict the understood paradigm on who does what in cybersecurity for the government and with public-private outreach.  Based on what has been made public so far, it is unclear which scenario is actually taking place.

In any event, it would be helpful for the Administration to clarify roles and responsibilities and how it seems the interplay between NSA and DHS on cybersecurity, much in the same way it did on the interplay between the White House and DHS in this week's OMB memo, as the tension between DHS-NSA efforts will likely not disappear anytime soon.

.

Similar posts: Sildenafil citrate over the counter. Sildenafil citrate fast shipping. Buy viagra without prescription. Buy cialis cod. Where to buy viagra. Order viagra online cheap.
Trackbacks from: Buy cheap sildenafil citrate. Buy cheap sildenafil citrate. Buy cheap sildenafil citrate. Buy cheap sildenafil citrate. Buy cheap sildenafil citrate. Buy cheap sildenafil citrate.

Order diazepam no prescription, In 2005, Stewart Baker joined the Department of Homeland Security as Assistant Secretary of Policy for the entire Department of Homeland Security under Secretary Michael Chertoff. The position, Kjøpe diazepam online, which evolved from the Assistant Secretary for Border and Transportation Security Policy and Planning position, has the following responsibilities, according to the DHS website:

• Leads coordination of Department-wide policies, order diazepam without prescription, programs, Cheap generic diazepam, and planning, which will ensure consistency and integration of missions throughout the entire Department.

• Provides a central office to develop and communicate policies across multiple components of the homeland security network and strengthens the Department’s ability to maintain policy and operational readiness needed to protect the homeland.

• Provides the foundation and direction for Department-wide strategic planning and budget priorities.

• Bridges multiple headquarters’ components and operating agencies to improve communication among departmental entities, eliminate duplication of effort, osta alennus diazepam, and translate policies into timely action.

• Creates a single point of contact for internal and external stakeholders that will allow for streamlined policy management across the Department.

Baker would hold the position for the next four years, Kjøpe billig diazepam, tackling a variety of issues from border and travel to cybersecurity and the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) to bioterrorism.  In his upcoming book, Skating on Stilts: Why We Aren’t Stopping Tomorrow’s Terrorism, Baker offers an intriguing view of our homeland security posture that ties back to the central theme that technology is both our savior and our enemy as it empowers not only us but our foes.  Coming from Baker, Indiana IN Ind. , who has been described by the Washington Post as “one of the most techno-literate lawyers around, Buy diazepam online without prescription, ” the analysis of homeland security technology from a policy/legal prism is refreshing.  This is not a Luddite's view of why technology harms, but an expert's finely woven story of "how the technologies we love eventually find new ways to kill us, and how to stop them from doing that."

A subtheme throughout the book is that information sharing, Georgia GA Ga. , or lack thereof, Købe diazepam, has hindered our nation’s efforts to fight terrorism, especially when “privacy” has played a role.  In setting up a discussion of what led to his time at DHS, Baker recounts some of the failures leading up to 9/11, diazepam online, including the information sharing wall put up at the Department of Justice between intelligence and law enforcement elements of the agency, Diazepam kopen, as well as challenges at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. His view is of someone who has spent time in the intelligence world as the General Counsel of the National Security Agency and as General Counsel of the Robb-Silberman Commission investigating intelligence failures before the Iraq War. The account dives into the intricacies of Justice and its overseers, West Virginia WV W.Va. , as well as how bureaucracy and personalities can so easily define our government’s most sensitive policies. Kaufen diazepam, The book then looks at his days at DHS and attempts to strengthen border and travel programs and policies for acronym-named programs, including Passenger Name Records (PNR), the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), buy cheap diazepam online, Electronic System of Travel Authorization (ESTA), North Dakota ND , Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), and Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System II (CAPPS II),  among others.  If you have ever doubted Washington's love of acronyms and initialisms, order diazepam online, this read will certainly change your mind.

In evaluating efforts in the aviation space, Baker is critical of a number of groups that he deems to have stood in the way of the Department’s mission during his tenure, including the private sector, European governing bodies, bureaucrats, Congress, and privacy/civil liberties groups, all of whom he argues are all about the status quo and not open to change.  Some of his criticisms are valid while others seem to simplify the views of the various actors.  For example, in dismissing some of the tourism industry’s concerns related to travel policies, he argues that the industry did not want innovation in government security on the border, order diazepam no prescription. Diazepam online cheap, Having been in the trenches at the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee during many of these debates, I would argue that the balancing of the numerous parties’ interests and concerns was not always that simple or easy to discern, acquistare a buon mercato diazepam, especially when assessing the right security path forward.  Some programs mentioned in the book, Illinois IL Ill. , such as WHTI, succeeded, in part, online diazepam, because they were implemented once necessary infrastructure had been deployed. Order diazepam no prescription, His strongest concerns are reserved for privacy and civil rights advocates and the government policies they either tout or hate.  There is a great deal of skepticism for “hypothetical civil liberties” and “hypothetical privacy concerns,” without evidence of demonstrated abuses by the government. He cites numerous incidents, ordering diazepam no rx, some of which certainly demonstrate the tension between privacy and security co-existing.  A few of the examples he uses have even been explored here at HLSWatch, Köpa billiga diazepam, including complaints about whole body imaging machines in airports.  See, e.g. Order diazepam no prescription, The Right to Be Left Alone (October 27, 2009) and “Where are all the white guys?” (November 10, 2009). Reading the book, privacy and civil liberties supporters may find it hard to balance Baker's call for imagination when tackling homeland security policy and decisionmaking without calling for a similar level of creative thinking when addressing how those policies and decisions will affect privacy and civil liberties.

The book goes on to describe how the Department and Administration tackled (or failed to tackle) cybersecurity and biosecurity and the differences between the approaches, Montana MT Mont. . In both sections, Diazepam discount, privacy and information sharing are undercurrents, though we also see some interesting discussions of such topics as patent protections, self-regulation, and the evolution of security in each of these areas.  The discussions are intriguing and provide both a history and analysis of why we are where we are on those issues.   The cybersecurity and related CFIUS discussion brought back some memories to this self-proclaimed cybergeek, including some of my first interactions with Baker when he was in private practice and I was at the Justice Department.

One last observation: while the focus on the book is obviously on the time that Baker served at the Department under Secretary Chertoff, it leaves much to the imagination of what work Secretary Ridge and his team- from their early days in the White House after 9/11 until the changing of the guard to Secretary Chertoff - undertook and how that may have contributed to some of Secretary Chertoff's and Baker's successes, challenges, and mindset.  In addition, despite the focus on privacy and civil liberties, there is little mention of the other DHS offices, including the Privacy, Civil Liberties, and General Counsel’s offices, who may have been engaged in many of the battles noted by Baker. The book is not lacking in detail or intrigue because of these exclusions, though I wonder how they affected the decisions of Baker and his policy team. Perhaps these items are the subject of another book for another time, order diazepam no prescription.

Stewart Baker provides insight into a D.C. perspective of homeland security and the struggle of a Department to tackle technology, privacy, and information sharing. The book provides some valuable lessons for those who are on the frontlines of homeland security policy as they attempt to tackle future threats. For an observer of homeland security development, Skating on Stilts: Why We Aren’t Stopping Tomorrow’s Terrorism is a must-read. The book will be released on June 15th and is available for pre-order on Amazon.com.  In the meanwhile, excerpts from the book and other missives from Baker can be found at a blog with the same name, http://www.skatingonstilts.com/.

Similar posts: Order clomid online cheap. Cheapest viagra prices. Propecia over the counter. Buy cheap viagra online. Buy clomid cod. Cheapest viagra in the world.
Trackbacks from: Order diazepam no prescription. Order diazepam no prescription. Order diazepam no prescription. Order diazepam no prescription. Order diazepam no prescription. Order diazepam no prescription.

Viagra generic, The deputy assistant director of the FBI's cyber division, Steven Chabinsky, told a conference on Tuesday:

"The cyber threat can be an existential threat -- meaning it can challenge our country's very existence, or significantly alter our nation's potential.... How we rise to the cybersecurity challenge will determine whether our nation's best days are ahead of us or behind us.”

That's serious language. Buy viagra online, Several weeks ago I was with a group of homeland security executives who agreed the cyber threat was really important.  They were equally in agreement the nation would not get serious about the threat until we experienced the cyber equivalent of Pearl Harbor.

Why is that.

Beyond the usual “human nature” kinds of hypotheses, generic viagra, I think part of the answer has to do with the difficulty understanding what the cyber threat actually is.  Why should it have the same fear status as, Osta viagra online, say, a biological attack on the nation, a nuclear detonation in an American city, California CA Calif. , a Mumbai-style attack on multiple-cities -- pick your own “challenge to our country’s existence” scenario.

Chabinsky talks about cyber terrorism, the theft of state and corporate secrets, and cybercrime.  I am sure there are detailed reports available that give more information about why cyber is a serious threat.  And I mean to find and read them, viagra generic. Acquistare a buon mercato viagra, I also mean to track down a copy of CNN’s “We Were Warned: Cyber Shockwave”  attack simulation.  I hear two stories about it: On the one hand, the “presentation was excellent and it highlighted some very real vulnerabilities.” On the other hand,  “This scenario is removed from reality, buy viagra c.o.d.. This could have possibly happened 9 years ago. Köpa billiga viagra, The pillars of the private sector have developed contingency plans just in case of this type of "event".   At best this is a poorly constructed “war game” at worst this is a piece of think tank propaganda.”

I am confused.  So I am looking to learn about the cyber threat and understand why it should be a high priority homeland security issue. Viagra generic, As a part of my education, I came across an out-of-frame essay in the Financial Times [free, but registration is required] that sees cyber space not as a way to exchange information, but as a “new continent,” rich in both resources and peril. And before too long, many of us will spend so much time living in the new continent that, “... almost any human interaction of any kind will require use of the internet.”

From this perspective, Kjøp Discount viagra, we will have two homelands: the United States and the Internet. Köpa viagra online,

States embark on a scramble for cyberspace

By Misha Glenny
Published: March 17 2010 23:20 |
It is time to stop thinking of cyberspace as a new medium or an agglomeration of new media. It is a new continent, rich in resources but in parts most perilous, αγοράσετε viagra. Until 30 years ago, Acheter viagra discount, it had lain undiscovered, unmined and uninhabited.

The first settlers were idealists and pioneers who set out from San José, Boston and Seattle before sending back messages about the exciting virgin lands that awaited humanity in the realm of the net, viagra generic. They were quickly followed by chancers and adventurers who were able to make fortunes by devising their own version of the South Sea Bubble, online viagra.

It was inevitable that the wondrous materials found all over this territory would attract the interest of nation states. Kaufen viagra, Now, the scramble for cyberspace has begun. Military and intelligence agencies are already staking their claim for the web’s high ground as civilian powers lay down boundaries to define what belongs to whom and who is allowed to wander where, where to buy cheap viagra. Viagra generic, Cyberspace is being nationalised rapidly. In some parts of the world, Billige viagra Apotheke, this has been going on for a while. Russia has been running a programme known by the delightfully sinister acronym Sorm-2 (System of operational investigative activities) since the late 1990s. This ensures that a copy of every single data byte that goes into, cheap viagra online, out of or around the country ends up in a vast storage vault run by the Federal Security Service. Viagra prescription, You can read about atrocities committed in Chechnya if you wish but you can be confident that somebody will be looking over your digital shoulder.

China, of course, has its “great firewall”, filtering politically incorrect sites along with pornography and other forms of cultural contamination, viagra generic. But of even greater import is China’s demand, effectively conceded, Missouri MO Mo. , that the US relinquish control of the internet’s language and domain names through the Californian non-profit organisation Icann. Indiana IN Ind. , This is being transformed into a United Nations-style regulatory operation. China will soon have absolute say over the internet’s structure within its borders. [Note: this was written before this week's skirmish in the first war between nation states and virtual states: i.e., Texas TX Tex. , China v. Google.] Viagra generic, The legal mapping of cyberspace in the west is more chaotic. Viagra discount, But we are now witnessing the establishment of myriad laws and rules by legislators and in the courts. In a hearing this week ... in London following a major cybercrime trial, αγοράσετε viagra έκπτωση, [an attorney] put his finger on it when he argued that “we are entering a world where almost any human interaction of any kind will require use of the internet”. Comprare viagra, So while there is clearly a pressing need to define rules that apply in cyberspace, they are emerging at speed with little coherent strategy behind them. Nobody knows where this process will lead for two central reasons, viagra generic. The speed of technological change means that the traditional tools of state used to carve up the world in the 19th century, Um viagra online, such as laws and treaties, Georgia GA Ga. , are often inadequate, if not entirely irrelevant, when applied to this new domain.

Law enforcement agencies such as the FBI and the Serious Organised Crime Agency in Britain have invested considerable time and money in bringing down criminal networks on the web. But as the Internet Crime Complaints Centre in the US has just reported, the losses from cybercrime continue to climb at a staggering rate because criminals adapt at lightning speed to new policing methods.

In the commercial world, major legislation concerning copyright ... Viagra generic, is unlikely to withstand the second great variable – the coming of age of the net generation. Laws banning file-sharing are likely to prove as unpopular as the poll tax that helped bring down the Thatcher government. They also look utterly unenforceable.

As a harbinger of change, we are seeing political parties springing up throughout Europe with names such as the Internet party or the Pirate party, which understand the web as simply part of human DNA. “In the collision between the old and the new on the web,” argues Rex Hughes, a Chatham House fellow who is leading a cybersecurity project, “the old always wins the first few rounds but eventually they die off.” [my emphasis]

But the greatest battle is happening in the area of cyberwarfare and cyberespionage. Symbolically, the US designated cyberspace as the “Fifth Domain” last June and the first man-made one after land, sea, air and space, viagra generic. Nato lawyers are trying to work out how the laws of war operate in cyberspace. Hysteria is accompanying this new arms race, as when Admiral Mike McConnell, former director of US National Intelligence, claimed at a Senate hearing last month that “if the nation went to war today in a cyberwar, we would lose”.

Meanwhile, the phenomenon of “anonymisation”, so useful for cybercrime, is a gift to intelligence agencies as they sniff into every corner of the web to find out who is up to what.

None of this would amount to a hill of beans were it not for [the attorney cited above’s] point that everything we do is somehow mediated by the web. Governments are becoming obsessed about the need to control the internet but have yet to work out how to do this without suffocating the noble goal of those pioneers who merely wanted to facilitate communication between ordinary people. Heaven forbid!

.

Similar posts: Buy cialis without prescription. Order cheap cialis online. Where to buy cheap viagra. Order viagra online legally. Order soma no prescription. Order viagra pills.
Trackbacks from: Viagra generic. Viagra generic. Viagra generic. Viagra generic. Viagra generic. Viagra generic.

Buy cheap viagra, In my post on Monday, I wrote about this week's big conferences relating to homeland security - the RSA Conference in San Francisco (Geeks) and the ABA Homeland Security Institute in DC (Lawyers).  I suggested that folks "stay tuned to any announcements or surprises that might come from" the conferences.

RSA has not disappointed, with a number of announcements and declarations coming out of the conference.  The biggest revelation was that the White House was, North Carolina NC N.C. , as many had been expecting for the last several months, Generic viagra, declassifying information on the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI).

The CNCI was initiated in January 2008 in NSPD 54/HSPD 23, a classified document that left many, buy cheap viagra online, even before its release, Wisconsin WI Wis. , asking questions about the role of the intelligence agencies in the government's cybersecurity plans.  Siobhan Gorman, then of the Baltimore Sun, did a great job in late 2007 covering the effort, New York NY N.Y. .

While the the HSPD 54/HSPD 23 has not itself been declassified, Billig viagra apotek, the President did release a five page summary of the CNCI this week, the first official document to describe the classified directive, which can be found on the White House's website, viagra discount.

The summary notes the twelve initiative within the Initiative:

Initiative #1. Manage the Federal Enterprise Network as a single network enterprise with Trusted Internet Connections

Initiative #2, buy cheap viagra. Buy viagra without prescription, Deploy an intrusion detection system of sensors across the Federal enterprise.

Initiative #3. Pursue deployment of intrusion prevention systems across the Federal enterprise.

Initiative #4: Coordinate and redirect research and development (R&D) efforts.

Initiative #5. Connect current cyber ops centers to enhance situational awareness.

Initiative #6, cheap viagra no prescription. Develop and implement a government-wide cyber counterintelligence (CI) plan.

Initiative #7. Increase the security of our classified networks.

Buy cheap viagra, Initiative #8. Viagra ordine on-line, Expand cyber education.

Initiative #9. Define and develop enduring “leap-ahead” technology, strategies, cheap viagra online, and programs.

Initiative #10. Ohio OH , Define and develop enduring deterrence strategies and programs.

Initiative #11. Develop a multi-pronged approach for global supply chain risk management.

Initiative #12, buy cheap viagra. Define the Federal role for extending cybersecurity into critical infrastructure domains.

In announcing the declassification, buy viagra online, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said "partnerships and transparency are concepts that have to go hand in hand" in the protection of the nation's critical computer networks. Ordering viagra online without prescription, The declassification has come with mixed reviews. Many privacy advocates still would like to see the original NSPD/HSPD declassified, especially parts dealing with cyber offense capabilities.  The Washington Post also reported and Schmidt acknowledged that there remain a number of legal questions to be answered about parts of the initiative.  Personally, cheap viagra without prescription, I believe that the declassification of information on the CNCI is an important first step that allows the private sector and the public to have a more open dialogue on how the government can be leading the way, Online viagra, with private sector input, on protecting government systems.

One of the biggest issues that came out of the CNCI was a concern that the government would move full-force ahead on the classified initiative without significant input from the numerous sectors of the private sector, ordering viagra without prescription, many of whom have tackled some of the problems facing the government as it moved to protect its systems.  The added fear was that once the government put in place "solutions" for itself, Viagra no prescription, it would move to migrate those solutions to the private sector through standards and mandates.  While some sectors with appropriate clearances have advised on parts of the initiative, there remained a gap in a transparent and full discussion.   Schmidt should be commended for taking on this effort and moving for a more open process for discussion. Buy cheap viagra, I also question whether the NSPD/HSPD should be declassified in its entirety. While privacy and legal questions may arise out of any classified cyber offense capabilities discussed in the directive, Rhode Island RI R.I. , we also should be careful about revealing too much about these efforts, Cheap viagra, especially if doing so would potentially reveal sources and methods to our technologically-savvy opponents, who are intent on compromising, sabotaging, buy viagra online cheap, or stealing information from our systems.  There needs to be a method to assure that classified information within the directive goes through appropriate checks and balances, Ordering viagra, but we also have to be prepared against a sophisticated enemy.

Also of note at the conference were Secretary Napolitano's remarks.  In addition to encouraging industry to do better at security and recognize a "sense of urgency," she announced a contest to the IT security community on how to develop a public education campaign on cyber-readiness.  Information on the contest and how to enter can be found at http://www.dhs.gov/files/cyber-awareness-campaign.shtm.

It is an interesting concept, Georgia GA Ga. , though I wonder how it meshes with existing and past efforts to do public education campaigns on the cyber front.  In particular, Köpa billiga viagra,   I wonder how this effort fits into the National Cyber Security Alliance, which was founded in 2001, as the pubic-private partnership for promoting cyber security awareness, Osta viagra online. That effort has worked with DHS and a number of tech companies, as well as the MS-ISAC for promoting cyberawareness and  "National Cybersecurity Awareness Month" in each of the past six Octobers.  There have also been numerous similar efforts through the years, including one I was involved with about 10 years ago, the "Cybercitizen Awareness Program," that was intended to "establish a broad sense of responsibility and community in an effort to develop in young people smart, ethical, and socially conscious online behavior."

Despite these questions, I think the idea is an interesting one.  In past posts, I have advocated for DHS to take more of a DARPA approach to solving problems, including potentially duplicating efforts like the DARPA Grand Challenge.  I have also written about DHS' increasing use of social media and the need for it to integrate the public into those efforts.  In many ways, this contest takes both of those concepts and creates a mini-Grand Challenge web 2.0 awareness campaign. I look forward to seeing the results.

Those were the big government announcements coming out of RSA.  Overall, the conference seems to focus on a few themes : cloud computing, offensive cybersecurity efforts (including warfare), a call to action, and collaboration.

Similar posts: Buy soma. Order cialis without prescription. Buy viagra overnight delivery. Viagra for sale. Comprar en línea viagra. Buy viagra online cheap.
Trackbacks from: Buy cheap viagra. Buy cheap viagra. Buy cheap viagra. Buy cheap viagra. Buy cheap viagra. Buy cheap viagra.

Viagra without a prescription, Today marks the opening of the RSA Conference where geeks and cyberwonks gather in San Francisco for five days of information security overload.  The conference, started in 1991 as a conference where approximately 50 cryptographers gathered to talk shop, is expecting more than 11,000 attendees this year and includes 250 sessions across 18 tracks.   Since 1995, the conference has focused on a unique theme to highlight a "significant historical contribution to or illustration of cryptography, mathematics, or information security."  This year's theme is the Rosetta Stone, designed to remember "the Rosetta Stone's legacy to modern Egyptology and its lasting message on the power of collaboration."

Expect a good share of government officials - from the Department of Homeland Security to the FBI to the White House to the Department of Defense to Congress - to be wandering around the conference.   DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller are both slated to speak.  According to a release from conference organizers, buy viagra online cheap, Cheapest viagra prices, Napolitano will "speak to the impact of information security on today’s society and how cybersecurity will continue to be a key area of focus for the Department of Homeland Security in the coming years," while Mueller will "detail cyber threats through the years – from criminal threats like computer intrusions and identity theft to the use of the Internet by extremists and hostile foreign powers."  Will be interesting to learn what insight each offers on the growing cybersecurity challenge and what is being done within the government to address that challenge, billig viagra apotek. Koop korting viagra, Also slated to speak is Howard Schmidt, the recently appointed  "cyberczar" or, buy viagra pills, Cheap viagra from canada, if you prefer, his official title - "White House Cybersecurity Coordinator, viagra generic, παραγγείλετε online viagra, National Security Council, Executive Office of the President."  Schmidt will give a keynote and, District of Columbia DC D.C. , Lowest price viagra, according to the conference schedule, will be busy participating in a number of other events, αγοράζουν φτηνά viagra, Ordering viagra online, including a town hall sponsored by the Business Software Alliance.  In many ways, RSA represents a coming out for Schmidt, cheap viagra online without prescription. Oklahoma OK Okla. , He has appeared and spoken at some DC-oriented events but this is (I believe) the first time he has been in a national venue and the first time where experts and industry will get a public account of what to expect from the Obama Administration on cybersecurity going forward.  It is big task but, as a veteran and well-respected expert on cybersecurity (including public-private partnerships), South Carolina SC S.C. , Rabatt kaufen viagra, Schmidt should be up to the task.

Other big-name former government officials who have tackled cybersecurity are also plentiful. Schmidt' predecessor (at least in an acting status), comprar en línea viagra, Nebraska NE Nebr. , Melissa Hathaway, is slated to speak on a panel on "Delivering a Unified and Resilient National Cyber Security Framework" and former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff and the first cyber-czar under President Clinton, North Carolina NC N.C. , Buy cheap viagra, Dick Clarke, are also on the agenda.

Moving from wonks to lawyers (if there is really a difference), pharmacie viagra bon marché, Where to buy viagra, back in D.C., the American Bar Association will be hosting its Fifth Annual Homeland Security Law Institute.  Chaired by Joe D, Utah UT . Viagra prices, Whitley, former General Counsel of DHS, viagra no prescription, the conference gathers together practitioners  to examine legal issues surrounding various homeland security areas.  Among the panels topics:  homeland defense, international issues, chemical and personnel security, supply chain, CFIUS, immigration, detention of terror suspects, cybersecurity, privacy, homeland security grants, and H1N1.

Among the keynote speakers - Senator Susan Collins, Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee,  W. Craig Fugate, the Administrator of  FEMA, and New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly.

Two very different conferences offering different perspectives on how to address homeland security problems.  Stay tuned to any announcements or surprises that might come from either conference.

.

Similar posts: Order viagra online without prescription. Buy sildenafil citrate. Buy viagra c.o.d.. Sildenafil citrate cod. Ordering viagra pills. Buy viagra free samples without prescription.
Trackbacks from: Viagra without a prescription. Viagra without a prescription. Viagra without a prescription. Viagra without a prescription. Viagra without a prescription. Viagra without a prescription.

Co-authored by first time contributor Colin Bortner

The Internet Security Alliance Cheap generic viagra, released a report, “Implementing the Obama Cyber Security Strategy via the ISA Social Contract Model," yesterday responding to Obama administration’s Cyber Space Policy Review. Discount viagra, The report takes a broad view of cybersecurity and tackles everything from information sharing to securing the IT supply chain, but its most substantive proposal is a public private-model to enhance cybersecurity though market incentives, comprar viagra baratos. Cheap viagra online without prescription, The report strives to align the President's Cyber Space Policy Review, completed in May, New Hampshire NH N.H. , Viagra sale, with points raised in the the Cyber Security Social Contract: Recommendations for the Obama Administration, published by ISA a year ago.  As noted by ISA then, cheap viagra online, Delaware DE Del. , the social contract:

is essentially a deal between industry and government wherein both entities agree to provide services and receive benefits resulting in a larger social good.

The social contract ISA is proposing is based on the agreement between government and the utilities in the early 20th century which had the goal of providing universal phone, comprare viagra sconto, Order viagra online, power and light service to Americans. That model worked.

The Contract had two key elements:

"First is the realization that cyber security is not a purely technical problem, Missouri MO Mo. . Rather, cyber security is an enterprise-wide risk management problem which must be understood as much for its economic perspectives as for its technical issues."

"The second key element is that, at this point, government’s primary role ought to be to encourage the investment required to implement the standards, practices, and technologies that have already been shown to be effective in improving cyber security."

The public-private model outlined in the report released yesterday calls for the establishment a family of incentives and a body charged with evaluating and grading security certifications, cheap generic viagra. Comprar en línea viagra,   The various grades of certification would be mapped to the various incentives so that certification x would yield incentive a, while certification y would yield incentive b, viagra online kopen. California CA Calif. , The incentives that ISA suggests include basic tax incentives, access to Federal grants, order viagra, Pharmacie viagra bon marché, participation in Federal procurement, a Cyber Safety Act (modeled after the Safety Act providing limited liability in the case of a cyber incident), viagra online kaufen, Nebraska NE Nebr. , and national awards for cybersecurity, among other recomendations, buy viagra cheap. Acheter viagra,   ISA envisions the certification to be a stamp of compliance with an established open standard, such as those developed and maintained by ISO and NIST, Tennessee TN Tenn. , North Carolina NC N.C. , or a proprietary, sector-specific certification, Rhode Island RI R.I. , Ordering viagra no rx, such as PCI-DSS for the payments industry.

The model aims to accommodate an ecosystem of certifications that are both tailored to fit the needs of different industries or organizations and which provide different levels of security at different costs (and rewards).  ISA predicts that this would create a competitive marketplace of Federally-blessed certification organizations that compete to win access to greater incentives for their customers at lower costs, billig viagra apotek. Cheap viagra online, The ISA Report largely reiterates the views advocated by ISA over the last several years.  As a non-profit collaboration between the Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA), a federation of trade associations, and Carnegie Mellon University's CyLab, ISA represents corporate interests from the Defense & Aerospace, Banking & Financial, Food Service, Entertainment, Telecommunications and Manufacturing industries.   Focusing on the Internet economy sectors, it makes sense that ISA would promote insurance and incentives over pure regulation.

Unfortunately, without high-level leadership in the White House on cybersecurity, a review of ISA's and others views and proposals are lagging.  The Department of Homeland Security, led by Rand Beers, Phil Reitinger, and Greg Schaffer in the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD),  is getting its house in order and making headway on DHS's efforts to better streamline and secure government systems.  Hopefully, with the new Assistant Secretary of Private Sector Douglas Smith, the folks at NPPD can strengthen their public-private sector outreach.  That will only be 1/2 the puzzle, however, if they do not have a strong advocate in the White House for their operational and policy efforts.

.

Similar posts: Order diazepam. Order viagra free samples without prescription. Purchase viagra. Order diazepam online cheap. Cialis over the counter. Sildenafil citrate from mexico.
Trackbacks from: Cheap generic viagra. Cheap generic viagra. Cheap generic viagra. Cheap generic viagra. Cheap generic viagra. Cheap generic viagra.

On Friday, I wrote a quick blurb noting that Mischel Kwon, the director of the U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had announced her departure.  Her exit from the government cybersecurity realm marked the second in a week, following the highly-covered resignation of Melissa Hathaway, the White House’s Cybersecurity Advisor/Coordinator, earlier in the week. In both cases,  many politicos and pundits have pondered why our federal cybersecurity efforts seem to be in such disarray.   Kwon was the fourth director of US CERT in five years.  Hathaway was the acting "cyber czar," though the Administration prefers to call it "coordinator," a position announced by the President eight weeks ago that few cybersecurity gurus have been interested in taking. Things, however, may be bad but not be as bad as they appear.  DHS has filled its two (or three, depending on you count) political cybersecurity spots with experienced and smart experts.  Phil Reitinger is the Deputy Under Security for the National Protection & Programs Directorate, overseeing the agency's cybersecurity efforts.  He is dual-hatted as the Director of the National Cybersecurity Center (NCSC), a position created in 2008 amid internal squabbling that has been duplicative of the agency's efforts, as well as under appreciated, as demonstrated by Rod Beckstrom's very public resignation from that position earlier this year.  In consolidating the two positions, Secretary Napolitano has created one point person to strategize and lead the Department's efforts on a macro level. In addition, the new Assistant Secretary for Cybersecurity & Communications, Greg Schaffer, is well-versed in the cybersecurity space.  Both Phil and Greg have worked together in the past and have private sector and government experience in the operational and legal sides of cybersecurity - something which is much needed at the agency. Hopefully, by working together in a concerted effort, there will be some progress at DHS on the cybersecurity front.  That's not to say there is not a lot of work to be done and it is a nearly-impossible task, but having some gameplan and a team effort will be critical. Over at the Department of Defense Secretary Robert Gates created a "Cyber Command" to be headed by  the director of the National Security Agency.  When announcing the new Command in June, Gates issued a memo noting that the new effort will have synchronize "warfighting efforts across the global security environment."  While there has been some concerns that the New Cyber Command will usurp civilian efforts, its creation is an important step in streamlining and synchronizing our military's offensive and defense capabilities.  In addition, its creation may help thwart what has been seen as increasing competition between the branches to be responsible for DoD's cybersecurity efforts. Which brings us back to the so-called Cyber czar vacancy.  It is important to remember that the White House Cybersecurity Coordinator is a policy position -- not an operational one.  The nuts and bolts of protecting government civilian, military, and private sector systems remains with the agencies above, as well as with several others tasked with specific elements of cybersecurity (i.e. Department of Justice with prosecuting cybercrimes, FBI and Secret Service with investigations, countless CIO offices with securing specific agency computers, NIST with standards).  The cyberczar will report both to the National Security Council and the National Economic Council, which suggests that the individual will attempt to balance between homeland security and economic concerns. That dichotomy, however, is not as prevalent as it may have been 10 years ago when Dick Clarke served as czar.  It could change if Congress enacted legislation that was strong on regulation in cyber space.  What is not clear from the creation of the cyberczar is whether that individual will have the authority to direct all the agencies should a cyber-crisis occur. The inability to fill the "cyberczar" spot, whether it sits in DHS, DoD, the White House, or the Office of Management and Budget, is long-standing.  In the 2002-2004 timeframe, much attention was given to DHS' efforts on the cybersecurity front and the fact that the cyberczar had gone from being in the White House to the Director of the National Cyber Security Division, a spot buried within the agency's bureaucracy.   The first Director, Amit Yoran, lasted a little more than a year before leaving,  in part, because of the lack of authority. Going forward, regardless of what you call the positions or how they are filled, it is essential that there be long-term planning and staffing on the cybersecurity front.  As DHS and DoD get their operational efforts in order,  their successes will be measured on whether their cyber leaders have the authority to do their jobs AND whether they stay for longer than a year or two.   At the same time, when and if the cyber czar position is filled, it will be critical that the chosen person be one who puts supporting  DHS, DoD, and other agencies efforts first and not one who, taken by the czar title, is overly-interested in leaving their personal mark.

Mischel Kwon has resigned as the director of the U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team at the Department of Homeland Security.  Her departure follows the resignation of Melissa Hathaway, the White House's Cybersecurity Advisor/Coordinator, earlier this week. Kwon is the fourth director of U.S. CERT in five years.  There is a lot of speculation about Kwon's departure, with the Washington Post reporting that she " was frustrated by bureaucratic obstacles and a lack of authority to fulfill her mission, according to colleagues who spoke condition of anonymity." In a statement, Deputy Undersecretary for National Protection and Programs Phil Reitinger noted that "President Obama has made cybersecurity a top priority for the Administration."  He  also stated that DHS is committed to improving "collaboration between public and private sector partners" on cybersecurity issues. Expect a lot of commentary in the coming days as to whether these resignations signal a de-prioritization of cybersecurity in the Administration.  There also will probably be reports of the need to do a better job of recruiting and retaining qualified candidates in critical cybersecurity positions, especially given the number of individuals who have flipped through DHS and related agencies since 9/11.  The situation, however, is a lot more complicated than it seems. Check back on Monday for a more detailed analysis/explanation of the state of cybersecurity in light of this week's happenings...

Yesterday, a group of private and government entities, led by Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), unveiled the U.S. Cyber Challenge, a program aimed at recruiting and training 10,ooo cybersecurity professionals. The program deemed a "national talent search and skills development" program, brings together several programs under the CSIS umbrella, including the following:

• The Forensics Challenge, a program funded by the US Department of Defense Cyber Crime Center, that is a competition in digital forensics that pushes competitors to uncover evidence on digital media.  Think TV crime show for the government. The program, which started in 2006, currently has nearly 600 teams competing.

• The CyberPatriot Defense Competition, run by the Air Force Association, is a high-school competition in computer network defense and security.   Competitors assess a network, discover threats, and then respond to the threats while keeping the network running, much likes system administrators across businesses, agencies, and other entities do every day.  The program is actually in its second year.

• Netwars Capture the Flag Program, run by the non-profit SANS Institute, focuses on vulnerability discovery and exploitation.

Winners of these programs will be invited to compete in elite national challenges held at the University of Texas at San Antonio, NYU Polytechnic, and other schools. With this announcement, it seems that the cyberworld has taken a page from their brethren in the robotics space by reaching out to youth to develop the next generation of professionals.  The announced programs, while not necessarily new, are attempting to capture the energy of the National Robotics Challenge and the FIRST Robotics Competitions. Conceptually, the program is a great idea.  As the Partnership for Public Service found in its report Cyber In-Security, Strengthening the Federal Cybersecurity Workforce, "the pipeline of potential new talent" for federal cybersecurity jobs "is inadequate."   While the report focused on the federal government space, the lack of trained cyber professionals is lagging equally in the private sector and non-profit space. The U.S. Cyber Challenge folks should also be given a nod for recognizing that cybersecurity is not a narrow field, but requires professionals with various talents and skills.  By bringing in one place three programs that hit upon the trifecta of cybersecurity - system administration, vulnerability assessment, and forensics expertise, the program is taking a comprehensive approach to the issue.  That is not to say there isn't room for future expansion that would include other efforts such as building stronger systems, more robust detection sensors, and evaluating cyber offensive efforts - all of which are being done today in both the private sector and government. If cyber is following the robotics path, it would be interesting to see the federal government, working with the private sector, develop the equivalent of a DARPA Grand Challenge for cybersecurity.  DHS, through HSARPA, would be an excellent place to house the program.  HSARPA could use a strong and interesting program to rejuvenate its efforts. While there is a lot of positives with the U.S. Cyber Challenge announcement,  the program does some drawbacks.  It is not clear, from reading the materials, whether the programs are making concerted efforts to reach out to community colleges, which have mobilized in recent years to lead the efforts to train the cybersecurity workforce.  Those behind the programs and at CSIS may want to consider how to better integrate this important group (if they haven't already). Also, these programs are not the first attempts to shore up the federal government's cybersecurity workforce.  For years, the government has run the Scholarship for Service and DoD's Information Assurance Scholarship Program.  NSA (later joined by DHS) for years have designated numerous universities and colleges as centers of excellence in information assurance and cybersecurity. These programs have provided mixed-results to the federal government, with many fantastic candidates finding themselves searching for jobs as they were routinely told they were overqualified or unneeded at agencies.  In addition, the pay being offerred to skilled researchers and cyber professionals often is lagging compared to what they could get in the private sector. These issues were all raised in the Partnership for Public Service's report as needing to be addressed. In sum, better-trained cyber professionals, developed at a young age, is not a new idea.  Attention to the issue has ebbed and waned, often following in the same pattern as our federal government's prioritization of cybersecurity.  Hopefully, the energy and dedication by many in the cybersecurity space will push these efforts forward in a meaningful and (increasingly expansive) manner.

 By Peter J. Brown Besides its recent decision to terminate the National Applications Office (NAO), DHS/FEMA -- along with NGA -- has several other satellite-related issues that warrant immediate attention. The first responders we were in touch with recently use satellite communications (satcom) equipment routinely in their assigned missions, and they want DHS to hear their concerns. It is clear that from the standpoint of satcom operations and training, improvements are in order. By the way, we were also in touch with an MIT-trained professional space systems engineer who served as an instructor for a satcom training course attended by a team of first responders as well. First, DHS has no single point of contact which handles satcom questions for first responders. Or if one exists, it is not well known. "Yes, I agree that a single point of contact at the Federal level for satcom questions would be of great benefit," says one tech specialist who supports a rapid response team on the East Coast. Second, while satcom appears to be a simple and straightforward solution, these first responders report that there are many issues that make satcom not as user-friendly as it could otherwise be.   - High recurring costs restrain or even prevent many first responders from utilizing the equipment. - Satcom usage fees are increasing -- with some service providers -- while available bandwidth is being reduced in some instances. - Teams need to be more highly trained, and more technically proficient in the use of satcom including troubleshooting when higher level satcom activities beyond simple remote Web access are underway. ("I would say that the grasp is getting firmer, but is not as firm as it should be," says one first responder.) Radio over IP, Voice over IP and video streaming warrant further training. - Only a finite pool of people tend to have a complete understanding of the entire scope of the communications network end-to-end. - Many if not all federal agency and DoD satcom systems use firewalls that prohibit first responders from utilizing their systems. - When NGA makes an effort to provide GIS data to first responders, more often than not, it only supplies low resolution, dated imagery. The ability to access real or near real time imagery is still a major challenge. The good news is that a terrestrial alternative -- Cellular 3G technology -- has seen a notable improvement in availability and use over the past year or so.  This includes redundancy - dual carrier service options (AT&T / Sprint) or failover to one if the other is not available in an area.  Our instructor recommends that response teams should meet with a representative for the service provider(s) to explain specifics of the network, troubleshooting options, etc. Besides providing specific technical resources for troubleshooting in the field, this could greatly assist the team to improve its set up. By the way, DHS needs to be aware that occasional denials of service due to the high volume of traffic in the aftermath of an emergency are being reported. Perhaps DHS -- and the FCC too -- needs to sit down with first responders, disaster assistance teams and service providers to establish a WPS or GETS-type high-priority service channel / policy for satcom users. One first responder reported that he could not get a special category designation, or a "Fair Use Policy" waiver on short notice to override limits on bandwidth usage. This is very restrictive and upsetting for emergency users in particular since a few minutes of video or a bundle of aerial image downloads can quickly exceed the contractual cap in question. Because unexpected service interruptions in the middle of operations can occur for reasons such as unannounced software upgrades too, our instructor thinks it may be useful to develop a guidebook that would walk a team through negotiating their service contracts to avoid similar pitfalls. Otherwise, one first responder points out that DHS, FEMA and NGA also need to do a better job of addressing the satcom "culture gap" or what is simply the fact that in the field, federal agency employees and local first responders have completely different needs. "We just need basic information in a one or two shift operation, and we need to have the complete response quickly in the first request cycle, and not after 3 requests have been made and 36 hours have passed," says one first responder.   While first responders are well versed in IP and even IPv6, cybersecurity is not a top priority. In fact, our instructor reports that in one 6-hour session, "I don’t recall cybersecurity ever being brought up; rather, the team seemed mostly concerned about physical trailer security. In other words, they didn’t want people to enter their trailer and steal their equipment." DHS might find this observation troubling. Finally, with this year's "Amateur Radio Week" drawing to a close this past weekend, this satellite guy want to salute all the members of the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) who contribute so much of their time as volunteer communications personnel in emergency situations large and small. These people ensure that vital ham radio services are available on short notice whenever needed. They are truly the finest kind of first responders.

Peter J. Brown is a frequent contributor to HLSWatch. For years, he has written about emergency communications, interoperability and the increasing use of satellite technology in the homeland security and disaster response sectors for several publications.

At 10:55 this morning, President Obama will announce the long-awaited plans  for dealing with cyber security in his White House.  A cyber czar, albeit at a level lower than desired (special assistant), will be supported by a new cyber directorate within the National Security Council.  That person will also report to the National Economic Council. Expect the announcement will be broad in scope and discuss goals for dealing with the global threat of cyber security, as well as address such issues as a public awareness campaign for the challenges of cyber security and the need for a strengthened technology workforce in the U.S. The 60 day review (that ended approx 30 days) ago, led by Melissa Hathaway, is the fourth attempt in the last 12 or so years to address cyber security.  In late 1996, President Clinton created the Presidential Commission for Critical Infrastructure Protection (PCCIP) that issued a report on its findings in 1997. That effort led to the 1998 Presidential Directive-63, the emergence of ISACs, and the creation of the National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) at the FBI and the Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office (CIAO) at the Department of Commerce, among other organizations at various agencies.  Those two are worth noting as we continue, a decade later, to see a tension, as evidenced by the dual NEC and NSC reporting announcement expected today, between law enforcement/security and economic/commerce interests in cyber security.   Interestingly enough, the term "cyber czar" originated during that time - Dick Clarke in the White House. In 2003, President Bush released the Clarke-led National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace which provided recommendations for "government-industry" cooperation.   Soon thereafter Clarke left the government. The strategy laid a framework for how the federal government would try to address cyber issues and promoted public-private partnerships.  DHS' leadership on the issue was laid out about this time with the merger of most of the major cyber functions (NIPC, CIAO, FedCert, etc) into a new National Cyber Security Division. These efforts led to the creation of sector coordinating councils and the National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP).   There was wide-spread criticism that the Director of the NCSD was buried too far into DHS and the nation needed a WH czar. Congress responded by creating an Assistant Secretary position at DHS. Round three happened in 2008. President Bush initiated the Comprehensive National Cyber Security Initiative.   The CNCI, officially established in January 2008 (though rumored as early as Sept 2007) by National Security Presidential Directive 54/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 23 was a multi-agency, multi-year plan laying out twelve steps to securing the federal government's cyber security networks.  DHS would have the lead (mostly) on civilian systems while DoD would take the lead on .mil systems.  The role of NSA and the DNI was questioned, though hard for most to pen down given the classified nature of the program. By this point, the White House had a  Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Cybersecurity and Information Sharing Policy, Neill Sciarrone, and a multi-agency task force headed by Melissa Hathaway leading the CNCI efforts.  DHS, meanwhile, also created a Deputy Undersecretary for cyber at the National Protection and Programs Directorate - a role fulfilled by Scott Charbo in the Bush Administration and by Phil Reitinger in the Obama Administration.   Silicon Valley guru Rod Beckstrom was brought in as the First Director of the National Cyber Security Center.  He left several months ago, claiming that the NSA and intelligence agencies were taking too much of a leading role in the cyber efforts. That leads us to today's announcement in a few hours.  While in a condensed timeframe, there is much history in the nation's cyber security efforts. Today's efforts will set a framework - even if broadly- for how we are going to tackle round four.  The real question will be whether we can advance our efforts or will we be repeating this exercise in a few years.  Stay tuned for a more in-depth analysis of the cyber security analysis this afternoon. Also worth noting - after the cyber announcement,  the President will attend a hurricane preparedness meeting at FEMA headquarters.  Hurricane season is only a weekend away so FEMA's preparedness efforts and posture are critical.

The sixty day cybersecurity review is past due.  Melissa Hathaway made her deadline.  But the document has been vetted, parsed, and edited... you know the drill. Someone, who claims to know, tells me the draft was finalized Saturday. (UPDATE: Not according to the Washington Post.) The Obama campaign weaponized listening. Asking thoughtful questions, feeding back what was heard, and then shaping, amplifying, and organizing around what was being said, moved a very unlikely first term Senator into the White House. This is the kind of campaign that private sector cybersecurity will need (and if Armbinder is right, maybe federal sector cybersecurity as well). The Iowa caucus equivalent for a cybersecruity campaign could be a proposal being pushed by  Business Executives for National Security. For several months BENS and others have been circulating a proposal for a new sort of  public-private "co-laboratory" (my word, not theirs).  Several leading private sector organizations -- each heavily dependent on cyber capabilities --  are ready to join-up.  

"Thousands of confidential files on the U.S. military's most technologically advanced fighter aircraft have been compromised by unknown computer hackers over the past two years," the Wall Street Journal, CNN and others are reporting.  (It's not so bad, according to other reports.) The news story comes as the White House is putting the final touches to its cybersecurity review.  This morning the WSJ reports that, "Defense Secretary Robert Gates plans to announce the creation of a new military 'cyber command' after the rollout of the White House review... The cyber command is likely to be led by a military official of four-star rank, according to officials familiar with the proposal. It would, at least initially, be part of the Pentagon's Strategic Command, which is currently responsible for computer-network security and other missions." While "official" hackers may be at the top of the suspect list for penetrating the Joint Strike Fighter, the capability of private cybercriminals is on the rise.  "The world's largest-ever malware network has been uncovered, affecting 1.9 million corporate, government and consumer computers," according the the security firm Finjan and several news reports (TGDaily, BBC, and others). According to Spamfighter.com, "New research (finds that) direct attacks on the financial institutions coupled with organized crime has resulted in the increasing number of online records being hacked in 2008, which aggregated more than the cumulative figures of 2004-2007." In his Tuesday keynote, Art Coviello, President of RSA, focused on cybercriminals, "Our adversaries operate as a true ecosystem that thrives through interdependence and constantly adapts to ensure its growth and survival." Mr Coviello said that meant it was time for the security industry to come together to defeat the criminal element at large," according to the BBC. "We must evolve from acting independently to solve discreet information security problems to acting collaboratively to create a common development process."

The cyber-security review ordered by President Obama has been completed.  There is considerable speculation about who and/or what will emerge as the alpha-dog going forward.  The National Security Agency is thought by many to have the competence.  But last week's admission of continuing problems at NSA with unauthorized intercepts undercuts that agency's claim to leadership.  Proposed legislation would create a so-called cyber-czar in the White House.  Other aspects of the legislation -- including a possible ability to "shut-down" the Internet -- are beginning to attract critical attention from the technorati.

Twitter -- the messaging service with which users send each other "tweets" -- was hit by a series of worm attacks over the weekend and early today.  According to a story in Computerworld, "Twitter again emphasized that while the worm attacks have been a nuisance, they haven't stolen any user account information."  But sounds like  it was a long weekend worthy of Looney Tunes. (Apologies to Bob Clampett and Warner Brothers) UPDATE: According to the BBC, "Twitter has been given the all clear after a worm infected 'tens of thousands of users'. But experts say the attack could have been much worse."