Obama Makes Cybersecurity a Priority
By Manuel Flores | 07/25/2012 | Headline, Infrastructure, Issues, Safety | 9 Comments
President Barack Obama recently communicated his urge to have Congress pass the Cybersecurity Act of 2012.
In last week’s Wall Street Journal Opinion the President echoed his belief that the nation’s cyber defenses are at risk. Much of what he wrote was reminiscent of Len Wiseman’s 2009 movie, Live Free or Die Hard, when a former a Department of Defense analyst shut down the nation in a matter of days. In reality, the US does not have Die Hard’s hero John McClane to stop such a catastrophe.
President Obama details a hypothetical mass disaster that wrecked havoc on the nation’s transportation and water systems:
“Across the country trains had derailed, including one carrying industrial chemicals that exploded into a toxic cloud. Water treatment plants in several states had shut down, contaminating drinking water and causing Americans to fall ill.”
The remarks were inspired by the Black Hat 2012 Conference, designed to bring together leaders to define the future of information security, currently being held in Las Vegas this week. President Obama seeks to convince Congress to pass the revised bill.
Cyber warfare has recently emerged on the national conscience following incidents such as the famed Stuxnet virus in 2010, and the Israeli-US co-conspired Flame virus, both of which targeted Iranian nuclear facilities in attempt to slow down Iranian progress towards developing a nuclear weapon. Such incidents set forth the possibility of the United States facing retaliatory cyber attacks in the near future.
“We are going to try carrots instead of sticks as we begin to improve our cyber defenses,”Lieberman, said in an e-mail statement. “If that doesn’t work, a future Congress will undoubtedly come back and adopt a more coercive system.”
Recently the Iranian nuclear systems suffered another cyber attack. A researcher Mikko Hypponen at Finnish computer security firm, F-Secure, commented on his blog:
“According to the email our cyber experts sent to our teams, they believe a hacker tool Metasploit was used. The hackers had access to our VPN. The automation network and Siemens hardware were attacked and shut down. I only know very little about these cyber issues as I am scientist not a computer expert.
There was also some music playing randomly on several of the workstations during the middle of the night with the volume maxed out. I believe it was playing ‘Thunderstruck’ by AC/DC.”
In the op-ed, President Obama reiterates the potential consequences of a successful cyber-attack which could cause a financial crisis if banks were hit. In another hypothetical scenario, hospitals and water treatment plant failures would cause widespread illness and power plants outages could bring entire regions to a standstill.
Another bill passed by the House in April, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), details similar legislation to the Cybersecurity Act. President Obama has expressed that he will veto any bill that lack strong privacy and civil-liberties protection, and as such, CISPA’s future is none too bright.
Both bill will be heard by the Senate later this week.





Leave Your Comment →
9 Comments
Brad R. Schlesinger
07.25.2012
@bradschlesinger
The fear mongering over cyber warfare is largely baseless and is just simply attempts by the government to limit freedom on the internet, make it easier to spy on citizens, and control the content and information that gets disseminated through the web.
Bob Jackson
07.25.2012
“brad”; YOU may want to consider what Symatec is saying in their annual Threat Report, rather than claiming “Fear Mongering” as YOUR defense against cyber warfare.
Of the “Top 10″ Industrial Sectors, the “Government & Public Sector” represents 25% of the “Targeted Attacks” in 2011.
Note: … “Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) have become a buzzword used and misused by the media but THEY DO REPRESENT A REAL DANGER. For example, a reported attack in March 2011 resulted in the theft of 24,000 files from a US defense contractor. The FILES RELATED TO A WEAPONS SYSTEM under development for the US Department of Defense (DOD). Government agencies take this type of threat very seriously. For example, the US DOD has committed at least $500 (USD) MILLION to cyber security research and development and the UK Government recently released its Cyber Security Strategy, outlining a National Cyber Security Programme of work funded by the GBP £650 MILLION investments made to address the continuously evolving cyber risks, such as e-crime as well as threats to national security.
http://www.symatec.com/threat report
Faith Eischen
07.25.2012
@faitheischen
I think cyber warfare is real and requires government acknowledgement. It’s naive to think with the technological advancements made today that cyber technology would not be susceptible to attacks/hacking
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.25.2012
@craigschlesinger
It is also naive to think that the government can effectively police the internet. In fact, the government doesn’t do much of anything effectively, let alone efficiently.
Take the FDA for example. How many outbreaks do they stop? All I’ve witnessed are product recalls like Vioxx and telling people about spinach that had some E-Coli in it after people already ate it and got sick and died. Great use of federal funds. Oh, and raiding Amish dairy farms.
Yeah, that’s what we need, some more “government acknowledgement” in our lives. And so of course the US will seek to invade another entitty that they have no right invade, the Internet.
Bob Jackson
07.26.2012
“craig”; do YOU have any idea what the FDA is responsible for? FYI the major catagories are; Foods, Dietary Supplements, Human Drugs, Vaccines, Blood Products & Other Bi9ologics, Medical Devices, Electronic Products, Cosmetics, Veterinary Products and Tobacco Products. The FDA’s activities include; Safety, Labeling, Product/s Approvals, Manufacturing Standards, Performance Standards, Licensing, Testing Methods and Pre-Market Approvals.
Which industry/s, and which Acvities would YOU suggest we discontinue? Pace Maker safety? The amount of radiation being emitted from YOUR microwave oven? Or the Sanitation Standards of the facilitiesproducing Milk supplements for babies?
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.26.2012
@craigschlesinger
Call me crazy, but it seems that food and medical companies (and others) have a vested interest in NOT poisoning, maiming, and killing their own customers. We’re all human, and human error will inevitably occur in all walks of life, especially inside bloated bureaucratic agencies of the federal government. In that context, I’d rather have 300 million people making decisions for themselves and their families – where we can dilute the incidence of human error. On the flip side, however, a technocratic agency such as the FDA only has 11,516 employees, as of 2010 (http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/Transparency/Basics/ucm213161.htm), where the incidence of human error is exponentially higher.
Moreover, almost 4,000 FDA employees work in the ORA (office of regulatory affairs), the largest makeup of the FDA. There is another word for regulation in government: Cronyism. We’ve seen it smack us in the face with regard to Wall Street banks. Just because it’s less visible in the FDA does not mean it doesn’t exist in the same rampant fashion as anywhere else in government. To be skeptical of government in one aspect, only to turn around and tout their benevolence in another, while disregarding the very reasons as to why the skepticism existed in the first place is highly inconsistent.
I don’t want to get rid of safety standards or food labeling. Where we differ is that I think the market is a much more effective mechanism of measuring what consumers demand. Demand signals make market actors on the supply side react quickly and decisively or else they will LOSE out to a competitor(s). For example, there is market demand for raw milk. Amish dairy farmers surface to meet those demands. This is a consensual, nonviolent transaction between consenting parties. So the FDA responds with a military style raid on Amish dairy farms (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/13/mopping-up-the-raw-milk-mob/). If this isn’t the height of absurdity, then I don’t know what is.
At the end of the day, we need plans by the many, not by the few!
Bob Jackson
07.26.2012
“craig”; Cutting through the exhaustive composition, YOU are a “Staunch Deregulation Advocate” who,
I suspect espouses reducing the size of government – completely ignoring both intended and unintended consequences. But when YOU say; … “We’ve seen it smack us in the face with regard to Wall Street banks.” … That seems to me, an admission they ‘maybe More rather than Less’ regulation is required in some areas of industry. It is rather interesting to note, that given ‘Free Reign,’ what some men will do “For The Sake Of Profit.” …….
“
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.26.2012
@craigschlesinger
I apologize for my long-windedness, but sometimes it is required to get the facts and realities across, as well as engaging in a civil, constructive dialogue and debate. As to Wall Street…
The banks are already overregulated like you can’t believe. Like I noted previously, regulation is what causes crony capitalism. That’s because the large incumbent players in the industry write the regs to stifle competition and promote their own corporate oligopoly. I’m certainly not pro-big corporate interest, I’m pro-market. Calling for more, tighter regulations only give more power to the cronies in the private sector that captured the regulatory process from the cronies in the government (http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regulatory-capture.asp#axzz1wUPpxh2N). The true unintended consequences of an increased regulatory state are exacerbating the problems you seek to resolve. Its public choice economics (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PublicChoice.html) and textbook rent seeking (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/RentSeeking.html).
Markets are not perfect because they are made up of human activity. However, they are the best mechanism for ensuring a level playing field where these big banks are actually subjected to real market competition with little to no barriers for entrepreneurs to enter. That’s how we keep these yahoo’s honest and bring about better products and services at lower costs. Consumer demand is a powerful regulatory force. We shouldn’t discount that. We just have to give markets a chance to work. If we don’t try to control and steer the marketplace (which is futile to begin with), then it won’t go haywire. And just to be clear, we are about as far removed from free markets as we’ve ever been in this country.
I think we actually agree, for the most part, on the problems. But I maintain that government intervention in the economy invites the private sector to march on down to Washington, and all we the people are left with is Corporatism – the unholy alliance of business and government. So where we differ is I want little to no government intervention because that’s where the root of the problem lies.
Renaldo Babers
09.17.2012
Obama promises a lot of staff. Lets see.