KING JESUS IS COMING FOR US ANY TIME NOW. THE RAPTURE. BE PREPARED TO GO.
OBAMA MENTIONED IN HIS ADDRESS LAST NIGHT HE USED A DICTATORSHIP EXECUTIVE ORDER TO ENFORCE A CYBER BILL.OBAMA WILL PROBABLY HAVE BIGTIME CONTROL ON THE INTERNET NOW.
New York (CNNMoney) — Having run
out of patience for Congress to act on a cybersecurity bill, President
Obama has decided to take matters into his own hands.Obama will sign an executive order on Tuesday addressing the
country's most basic cybersecurity needs. The president also plans on
outlining its provisions in his State of the Union address this evening.The order will make it easier for private companies in control of
our nation's critical infrastructure to share information about
cyberattacks with the government. In return, the Department of Homeland
Security will share "sanitized" classified information with companies
about attacks believed to be occurring or that are about to take place.The president will also issue minimum standards for companies to
protect themselves from cybercrime, though there is nothing in the order
about how this will be enforced.This is hardly comprehensive, but at least it's something aimed at
protecting our nation's power, water and nuclear systems from attack.
That's more than Congress can say it has accomplished. Lawmakers failed
to pass any of the dozens of cybersecurity bills aimed at meaningfully
securing critical infrastructure from an online criminals.Meanwhile, the number of attacks on critical infrastructure
companies reported to a U.S. Department of Homeland Security
cybersecurity response team grew by 52% in 2012, according to a recent
report. Several of them resulted in successful break-ins.
While Obama's plan to remedy the problem is a start, critics say it has major limitations that make the order virtually meaningless."It doesn't have any teeth; it has no backing," said Rob Beck, critical infrastructure cybersecurity consultant for Casaba Security. "This is not going to have any measurable impact on anything."
Unlike Congress, the president alone does not have the power to protect companies from lawsuits when they are engaged in information sharing. Since the data they'd be handing over to the federal government could include private information from customers, companies likely won't share that information without guaranteed protections."Businesses have to be good citizens, but they also have to be concerned about their liabilities and interests of their users," said Evan Brown, senior counsel with InfoLawGroup, a law firm focused on digital privacy and cybersecurity issues. "There are all kinds of ramifications if companies are found not to be good protectors of user privacy."There are also concerns that the government's data won't be revealing enough. Unless the government provides details of where an attack is likely to come from and gives specific information about which systems are likely to be hit, the agencies won't be telling critical infrastructure companies anything they don't already know."I've seen sanitized classified documents -- I'm not sure how useful they'll be," said Beck. "They'll say your systems are a target, but no one in this field thinks their systems aren't a target."Despite partisan bickering over how to accomplish the task, virtually everyone agrees the status quo is unacceptable. Today, when companies are breached, most of that information stays internal. Companies don't want to be viewed by their customers, competitors or shareholders as weak on security, so few outsiders find out when a cyberattack has taken place.Lawsuits and public scrutiny over privacy violations could be damaging, but they'd pale in comparison to the outrage that would ensue if a company failed to prevent a crippling cyberattack. Remember how upset the nation was over a half-hour-long power outage during the Super Bowl? Best practice guidelines and systems for information sharing are a good start, but barring any carrots and sticks, it's unlikely that the executive order will accomplish much. That's why some are calling on the government to put in place mandatory standards that would put all companies in the same boat."Until stringent regulations are put in place, then I don't think we're going to make a lot of progress," Beck said.The White House agrees. It still wants Congress to give the Department of Homeland Security power to regulate critical infrastructure.And Congress may move quickly. On Wednesday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers plans on reintroducing the stalled Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, which passed a House vote in April but was never taken up in the Senate. That bill also faced an Obama veto threat over the perceived lack of privacy protections. Rogers believes his revised bill will address those concerns.
OBAMA MENTIONED IN HIS ADDRESS LAST NIGHT HE USED A DICTATORSHIP EXECUTIVE ORDER TO ENFORCE A CYBER BILL.OBAMA WILL PROBABLY HAVE BIGTIME CONTROL ON THE INTERNET NOW.
Obama enforces cybercrime preparedness with executive order
Wednesday, February 13, 2013 - 6:00am
While Obama's plan to remedy the problem is a start, critics say it has major limitations that make the order virtually meaningless."It doesn't have any teeth; it has no backing," said Rob Beck, critical infrastructure cybersecurity consultant for Casaba Security. "This is not going to have any measurable impact on anything."
Unlike Congress, the president alone does not have the power to protect companies from lawsuits when they are engaged in information sharing. Since the data they'd be handing over to the federal government could include private information from customers, companies likely won't share that information without guaranteed protections."Businesses have to be good citizens, but they also have to be concerned about their liabilities and interests of their users," said Evan Brown, senior counsel with InfoLawGroup, a law firm focused on digital privacy and cybersecurity issues. "There are all kinds of ramifications if companies are found not to be good protectors of user privacy."There are also concerns that the government's data won't be revealing enough. Unless the government provides details of where an attack is likely to come from and gives specific information about which systems are likely to be hit, the agencies won't be telling critical infrastructure companies anything they don't already know."I've seen sanitized classified documents -- I'm not sure how useful they'll be," said Beck. "They'll say your systems are a target, but no one in this field thinks their systems aren't a target."Despite partisan bickering over how to accomplish the task, virtually everyone agrees the status quo is unacceptable. Today, when companies are breached, most of that information stays internal. Companies don't want to be viewed by their customers, competitors or shareholders as weak on security, so few outsiders find out when a cyberattack has taken place.Lawsuits and public scrutiny over privacy violations could be damaging, but they'd pale in comparison to the outrage that would ensue if a company failed to prevent a crippling cyberattack. Remember how upset the nation was over a half-hour-long power outage during the Super Bowl? Best practice guidelines and systems for information sharing are a good start, but barring any carrots and sticks, it's unlikely that the executive order will accomplish much. That's why some are calling on the government to put in place mandatory standards that would put all companies in the same boat."Until stringent regulations are put in place, then I don't think we're going to make a lot of progress," Beck said.The White House agrees. It still wants Congress to give the Department of Homeland Security power to regulate critical infrastructure.And Congress may move quickly. On Wednesday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers plans on reintroducing the stalled Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, which passed a House vote in April but was never taken up in the Senate. That bill also faced an Obama veto threat over the perceived lack of privacy protections. Rogers believes his revised bill will address those concerns.
