Here is an article posted in the NY Times today "Control of Cybersecurity Becomes Divisive Issue" in which the possibility of giving Cybersecurity to NSA is discussed. The article seems to decide that this is a bad idea, primarily because of the fear that this would give too much power to one agency, especially an agency that is supposed to be focused outwardly on security, not inwardly. The article points to the recent resignation of Rob Beckstrom, the former director of the National Cyber Security Center at DHS as one of the primary reasons why granting responsibility of protection of CI from cyber attack to the NSA would be bad.
Overall, the article is not very good. It doesn't highlight anything of value in the actual debate. At most, it suggests that the responsibility should be split among agencies as a "checks and balances" because people fear that leadership in cyber security will grant someone supreme power to read emails and follow Google searches of US citizens and Federal employees. I honestly don't think anyone is itching to read everyone else's emails. I believe the main power comes from the ability to hack backwards to find the sources of hack attacks, although this is currently illegal in our law code.
Perhaps before granting power, they should decide on the actual legal framework for prosecuting cyber crimes, and decide how much leeway the government is willing to give to investigators to collect information to prosecute attackers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment