Re: [iwar] [fc:Cybersecurity.confusion.hampers.government]

From: e.r. (fastflyer28@yahoo.com)
Date: 2002-07-28 09:38:55


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-5072-1027874336-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 [204.181.12.215] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.7.4) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Sun, 28 Jul 2002 09:42:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 4161 invoked by uid 510); 28 Jul 2002 16:37:56 -0000
Received: from n3.grp.scd.yahoo.com (66.218.66.86) by all.net with SMTP; 28 Jul 2002 16:37:56 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-5072-1027874336-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com
Received: from [66.218.67.193] by n3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 28 Jul 2002 16:38:56 -0000
X-Sender: fastflyer28@yahoo.com
X-Apparently-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 28 Jul 2002 16:38:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 33593 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2002 16:38:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Jul 2002 16:38:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO web14510.mail.yahoo.com) (216.136.224.169) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Jul 2002 16:38:55 -0000
Message-ID: <20020728163855.20224.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [68.100.20.143] by web14510.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 28 Jul 2002 09:38:55 PDT
To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
In-Reply-To: <200207271729.g6RHTRi31111@red.all.net>
From: "e.r." <fastflyer28@yahoo.com>
X-Yahoo-Profile: fastflyer28
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 09:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [iwar] [fc:Cybersecurity.confusion.hampers.government]
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,RISK_FREE,FREE_MONEY,SUPERLONG_LINE version=2.20
X-Spam-Level: 


All of these parties have their own agenda-it would not be DC with an agenda-there is now way that this problem can be attacked in a logical way until "Core Issues" are agreed to by all parties.  That is a reasonable starting point and agendas get thrown out the window.  There will be a day of rekoning once the core problems are addressed, but it is going to take several years simply to reach that point.  Political "baby-steps" are indicated right now.  Those matters of individual interest  are a very long way in the offing despite the nagging that will continue.
 Fred Cohen wrote:http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/07/23/020723hngaostudy.xmlInfoworld
July 23, 2002 09:17 AM 

Cybersecurity confusion hampers government 
By Sam Costello 

U.S.  CYBERSECURITY POLICY and the protection of critical infrastructure
is being hampered by a failure to communicate between the large number
of federal organizations which have responsibilities in the area. 
Adding to the chaos are ill-defined relationships between the groups,
according to a new report released Monday by the U.S.  General
Accounting Office (GAO). 

"Without a strategy that identifies responsibilities and relationships
for all cyber [critical infrastructure protection] efforts, our nation
risks not having the appropriate structure to deal with the growing
threat of computer-based attacks on its critical infrastructures," the
report concluded. 

The GAO, which acts as the investigative arm of Congress, found that
there are at least 50 federal organizations that have responsibilities
related to cyber critical infrastructure protection (CIP), including
five advisory committees, six Executive Office of the President
organizations, 38 executive branch organizations associated with
departments, agencies or intelligence organizations and three other
organizations. 

These bodies come from a wide range of government organizations,
including the Office of Management and Budget, the U.S.  Federal
Communication Commission, the U.S.  Department of Defense, the U.S. 
Department of Justice, the U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency, the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S.  General Services
Administration, the report said. 

Communications channels are not adequately established between the
organizations, according to the report.  Though some of the bodies were
able to identify their relationship to other organizations generally,
"relationships among all organizations performing similar activities
were not consistently established," the report found. 

One example of the confusion about the function of different
organizations among the various groups cited in the report concerns the
National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC), the cybersecurity wing
of the U.S.  Federal Bureau of Investigation. 

"Discussions with officials in defense, intelligence and civilian
agencies involved in CIP ...  showed that their views of the NIPC's
roles and responsibilities differed from one another," though the NIPC's
role should be clear, according to the report. 

The communication issue and the definition of roles is set to be
addressed by the President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board in
a national cyber CIP strategy set to be released in September, the
report said. 

In its report, the GAO recommended that the strategy should define "key
federal agencies' roles and responsibilities associated with each
sector, and [define] the relationships among key CIP organizations."

The GAO has been a constant proponent of better cybersecurity in recent
years through the audits of a number of government agencies.  In
February, it released a report that called the Department of the U.S. 
Treasury's security measures "ineffective in identifying, deterring and
responding to computer control weaknesses promptly."

The GAO also criticized the NIPC in May 2001, saying that the body
failed to provide timely warnings of computer attacks. 

The full GAO report can be found on the organization's Web site at <a
href="http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02474.pdf">http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02474.pdf>. 


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Free $5 Love Reading
Risk Free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/NsdPZD/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2002-10-01 06:44:31 PDT