If you haven’t seen DOD: Hackers Breached U.S. Critical Infrastructure Control Systems, or similar coverage of Leon Panetta’s portrayal of Chicken Little (aka “Henny Penny”), you may find this interesting.
The InformationWeek Government article says:
Warning of more destructive attacks that could cause loss of life if successful, Panetta urged Congress to pass comprehensive legislation in the vein of the Cybersecurity Act of 2012, a bill co-sponsored by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., Susan Collins, R-Maine, Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., that failed to pass in its first attempt earlier this year by losing a cloture vote in the Senate.
“Congress must act and it must act now,” he said. “This bill is victim to legislative and political gridlock like so much else in Washington. That frankly is unacceptable and it should be unacceptable not just to me, but to you and to anyone concerned with safeguarding our national security.”
Specifically, Panetta called for legislation that would make it easier for companies to share “specific threat information without the prospect of lawsuits” but while still respecting civil liberties. He also said that there must be “baseline standards” co-developed by the public and private sector to ensure the cybersecurity of critical infrastructure IT systems. The Cybersecurity Act of 2012 contained provisions that would arguably fit the bill on both of those accounts.
While Panetta said that “there is no substitute” for legislation, he noted that the Obama administration has been working on an executive order on cybersecurity as an end-around on Congress. “We need to move as far as we can” even in the face of Congressional inaction, he said. “We have no choice because the threat that we face is already here.”
I particularly liked the lines:
“…That frankly is unacceptable and it should be unacceptable not just to me, but to you and to anyone concerned with safeguarding our national security.”
“We have no choice because the threat that we face is already here.”
Leon is old enough to remember (too old perhaps?) the Cold War when we had the Russians, the Chinese and others to defend ourselves against. Without the Cybersecurity Act of 2012.
Oh, you don’t know what the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 says do you?
The part Leon is lusting after to make private entities exempt from:
[Sec 701]….chapter 119, 121, or 206 of title 18, United States Code, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.), and the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.), ..
I’m sorry, that still doesn’t help does it?
Try this:
[Title 18, United States Code] CHAPTER 206—PEN REGISTERS AND TRAP AND TRACE DEVICES (§§ 3121–3127)
Just reading the section titles should give you the idea:
The Cybersecurity Act of 2012 exempts all private entities from criminal and civil penalties for monitoring, capturing and reporting any communication by anyone. Well, except for whatever the government is doing, that stays secret.
During the Cold War, facing nuclear armageddon, we had the FBI, CIA and others, subject to the laws you read above, to protect us from our enemies. And we did just fine.
Now we are facing a group of raggamuffins and Leon wants to re-invent the Stasi. Put us all to spying and reporting on each other. Free of civil and criminal liability.
A topic map could connect half-truths, lies and the bed wetters who support this sort of legislation together. (They aren’t going to go away.)
Interested?
PS: A personal note for Leon Panetta:
Leon, before you repeat any more idle latrine gossip, talk to some of the more competent career security people at the Pentagon. They will tell you about things like separation of secure from unsecure networks. Not allowing recordable magnetic media (including Lady Gaga CDs) access to secure networks, and a host of other routine security measures already in place.
Computer security didn’t just become an issue since 9/11. Every sane installation has been aware of computer security issues for decades.
Two kinds of people are frantic about computer security now:
- Decision makers who don’t understand computer security.
- People who want to sell the government computer security services.
Our military computer experts can fashion plans within the constitution and legal system to deal with what is a routine security issue.
You just have to ask them.
