The new version would allow the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for "cybersecurity professionals," and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.
Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to engage in "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government.
Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
I have mixed reactions to this. I'm all for net neutrality. I think that's hugely important. However, the gov currently has no infrastructure/plan to deal with "cyber" attacks (haha, who uses the word cyber anymore?!) I worked briefly with the Oregon Department of Justice on their model cyber security initiative. And, I will never work for any government agency again, even in contract capacity. They were the most unorganized, lazy people I've ever dealt with, so I wouldn't put much faith in anything coming of this. But that's besides the point. I'd have to see the full legislation. I read the excerpt, but I don't see where they get the "Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire.." I get that they have to share certain info with the gov, but the gov only has any say in what happens with that Network in a time of crisis. I don't think this is necessary because any private network will always have a better plan to defend it's own interests and integrity than the gov't. That said, the government surveys all our land, blueprints of buildings and all sorts of things so they can respond to fires, floods, or any other natural or man-made disasters, so in theory this is no different. But I'm definitely not a fan. -Matt
ReplyDeleteGood point Matt.
ReplyDeleteI guess I'm against this because it really reeks of violating net neutrality.
and you are right the Government surveys our land and whatnot, but like you said, they suck at it, not to mention slow.