CTOs, Global Cyberwar and Our Collective Future
If you are a technologist, please take a moment to download the PDF of the report by the U.S. Commission on Cybersecurity. This report, titled Securing Cyberspace for the 44th Presidency, is the best proclamation of the challenges of cyber I have read. It is also a roadmap that will help any trying to navigate these very tough issues.
I’ve been involved in things cyber for a long time. My deepest
involvement began in December 1998, almost 10 years ago to the day. In all that time I’ve seen lots of studies and lots of papers and many treatments of the issues. But I’ve never seen one that captures the complexities and the need for specific actions as well as this one.
I’d really recommend you read every word, if you want to be considered literate in this field. But if it will be a little while till you get to it, here are some key points:
The three major findings are: 1) Cybersecurity is now a major national security problem for the U.S., 2) Decisions and actins must respect privacy and civil liberties, and 3) only a comprehensive national security strategy that embraces both the domestic and international aspects of cybersecurity will make us more secure.
The report makes a few points about the Bush Administration’s Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI). In general the give credit to that initiative, and call it good. I agree, it is a great activity I’ve previously written about that is led by one of the most effective people in government today and has done great work. But as the commission points out, the work of the CNCI is good but not sufficient.
The biggest shock for me in this study: The amount of funding on R&D for cyber security. I have been looking into the many activities underway, and maybe that look made me deceive myself into thinking it was a well funded effort. According to the comission, however, they estimate that the total R&D funding in the federal government for cybersecurity is about $300million. Less than two-tenths of one percent of the total federal R&D.
The report has a great section on identity manangement.
I am convinced the organizational approaches outlined in the study are the right ones as well. There is only one place in our government where we can lead solutions to this challenge. Where is that? Hey read the report!
What else do I recommend CTOs do besides read the report? I think one way we can all help the cybersecurity effort is to think through which standards bodies are the most important to engage with regarding security. A few are here:
http://ctovision.com/2008/05/standards-organizations-ctos-should-track/
Related posts:
Thanks for the heads-up on that report, Bob. It’s a very thorough overview with some excellent recommendations. I was relieved to see that they acknowledge DHS should not be leading this effort.
Another key acknowledgment is that cyber security is not a domestic issue, but requires international cooperation.
Jeffrey,
Thanks much for the comment. I look forward to watching this unfold and something tells me the new approach will involve a wide swath of folks, which is good news.
Cheers,
Bob
I hope you’re right about that, Bob. I really do!
Bob – here’s hoping plenty of Beltway residents (including those just moving here as part of the new Admt) will read the report. I think our buddy Harry Raduege and my MS colleague Scott Charney did a great job as co-chairs.
One point I would temper your remarks with is on the level of federal R&D – you’re right, the level of federal spending is low, and should increase, but it is dwarfed by the amount of private-sector (tech company) R&D investments in security.
best – lewis
Lewis,
I agree with you totally about Raduege and Charney. They really did well here.
And that’s a good point, of course, about private-sector R&D. Another mutual friend of ours cornered me at the conference today and told me he wants to talk to you about that very thing… and idea on how to possibly steer some of your R&D with his to make a very positive, potentially significant impact on security. I’ll get you more separately.
Cheers,
Bob