iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

White House Cybersecurity Plan: What You Need To Know

White House Cybersecurity Plan

The Huffington Post   First Posted: 05/12/11 08:57 PM ET Updated: 07/12/11 06:12 AM ET

The White House has unveiled its proposal for far-reaching cybersecurity legislation that seeks to shore up the country's defenses against a growing number of threats to personal privacy, critical infrastructure, and the government's computing systems.

The plan covers four key areas: the protection of American citizens; the protection of critical infrastructure, such as the power grid and financial sector; the protection of government systems; and the protection of privacy and civil liberties.

The proposed legislation would institute harsher penalties for cybercriminals--cyber crimes would be added to RICO, the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act-- and also seeks to increase transparency by requiring businesses to alert their customers to data breaches. It would also require the Department of Homeland Security to work with the private sector, particularly energy companies and financial firms, to assist in identifying and addressing vulnerabilities.

“Our Nation is at risk,” the White House wrote in a statement. “The cybersecurity vulnerabilities in our government and critical infrastructure are a risk to national security, public safety, and economic prosperity."

In its description of how it intends to protect federal computer systems, the policy proposal notes that given the challenges of recruiting and retaining "highly-qualified cybersecurity professionals," the Department of Homeland Security would be given "more flexibility in hiring these individuals" and organizations would be encouraged to collaborate with the private sector. The plan also seeks to promote, not stifle, cloud computing: "This new industry should not be crippled by protectionist measures, so the proposal prevents states from requiring companies to build their data centers in that state, except where expressly authorized by federal law."

What is missing from the proposal, however, is any discussion of the extent of the government’s control over U.S. networks during an emergency. An Internet “kill switch” that would empower the President to turn off parts of the Internet had previously been discussed.

How will the plan be received by lawmakers and businesses?

Reuters writes, “It is unclear if the White House pressure will win support for stricter cybersecurity laws, especially among Republicans who control the House of Representatives. […]Previous bills with similar language have rankled corporate America as regulatory overreach, with many companies indicating they would fight any effort to be included as ‘critical infrastructure.’”

The Wall Street Journal reports, “Industry groups voiced initial support for the White House plan. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce praised the proposal as ‘the latest in a series of important actions’ by the White House on cybersecurity. Critics said the White House proposal, in trying to please business interests, doesn't do enough to require companies step up their computer security.”

Says Information Week, “The Republican-led House of Representatives and Democrat-controlled Senate remain at arms over several issues, including the balance of power on cybersecurity issues between the military and the Department of Homeland Security, and whether a comprehensive legislative overhaul should be accomplished in pieces or in one massive bill.”

The AP notes that critics say the plan doesn’t go far enough. Former senior Homeland Security official Stewart Baker said, “The Administration's proposal shows no sense of urgency…It tells even critical industries on which our lives and society depend that they will have years before anyone from government begins to evaluate their security measures."

Read the White House's fact sheet about the proposal here.

WATCH:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

The White House has unveiled its proposal for far-reaching cybersecurity legislation that seeks to shore up the country's defenses against a growing number of threats to personal privacy, critical inf...
The White House has unveiled its proposal for far-reaching cybersecurity legislation that seeks to shore up the country's defenses against a growing number of threats to personal privacy, critical inf...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 381
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:27 PM on 06/20/2011
The FBI is horrible at investigating and prosecuting cyber crimes, unless child porn is somehow involved.

Just got ripped off? You're on your own.
06:03 PM on 05/13/2011
go back on facebook, thats what you understand about the internet.
with slippery bama it's back to the future, 1984
photo
grant06
Socialism: Humanity's best future.
04:37 PM on 05/13/2011
Why do I get this feeling that this plan endangers my privacy, not enhances it. As a liberal, this is where I think government should not tread.
05:34 PM on 05/13/2011
Next they'll say, "Oh, don't worry"! We will just give u a new insurance plan and take your money.
photo
grant06
Socialism: Humanity's best future.
06:11 PM on 05/13/2011
That I'm not really worried about. Just got back from Europe and the folks over there can't beleive we STILL don't have universal healthcare. They understand why third world countries don't, but an industrialized nation without healthcare? How sad.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
David Landry
06:30 PM on 05/13/2011
Why? Well, let's assume you are a musician and want to share you music on the Internet and possibly make some money by distributing it directly to your fans.

But now the government has enacted this policy of moving everything to "the cloud". Problem is that "the cloud" is privately owned, and if you want to use the Internet, you have to use "the cloud", and in order to use "the cloud" you have to give up all your property rights to whatever you put on "the cloud".

Essentially what happens is that "the cloud" owner writes up the contract that you have to agree with if you want to use the Internet, and in that contract it essentially legalizes piracy (ie: they "legally" pirate your intellectual property.)

They wrap up your music in some DRM and then you have to pay to access your own property (or even put in prison if you try to circumvent the DRM system if you still happen to believe you have rights to the property you created.)

This whole scheme is not about security or your privacy .. it's just the logical first step in allowing corporations to steal you blind ... again.
photo
grant06
Socialism: Humanity's best future.
06:40 PM on 05/13/2011
That's not new. Back when I had my daily blog my copywritten content was stolen often. I'd find things I wrote all over the internet in both the US and overseas. If you believe your work product to have value: Do not post it to the internet.
07:10 PM on 05/13/2011
David, I couldn't of said it any better and I totally agree.
photo
randyman99
My micro-bio is almost full.
04:33 PM on 05/13/2011
Hey, Wow, we have a president who understand the "internets" and what cyber security is about. I feel safer knowing he is in the White House.
04:53 PM on 05/13/2011
No, we have a president who wants a hardcore tax on any independent site owners and wants to regulate each and every site like a cable plan. Compliments of Fascism at it's finest. And a way for the bigger branches of organizations to survive.
03:58 PM on 05/13/2011
Here's an idea. How about not building structures that can only run on computers. I am sick of hearing about this subject. I've heard that Obama wanted to regulate the internet and it looks like now that might happen. This country is going to hell and the sad thing is most people don't want to wake up. U call things like this being free? This isn't freedom.
photo
gingerred
Proud lesbian conservative
04:17 PM on 05/13/2011
well said
photo
cromag
ban the parties
03:38 PM on 05/13/2011
This looks like a double edged sword. While the government needs to do more about actual cyber crime i have a feeling this is going to used for so much more.
RICO to hammer groups like Anonymous?
03:25 PM on 05/13/2011
White House Cybersecurity Plan: What You Need To Know

I love it when I'm told what I need to know. What I need to know is what I'm not being told.
photo
Rude Monk
No God can stop a hungry man
12:08 PM on 05/15/2011
Funny yet true.Therefore you are fanned.
03:17 PM on 05/13/2011
And i have this really pretty bridge i will sell you!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
samtee
Shankapotomus.
02:39 PM on 05/13/2011
This coming from the administration that just extended the Patriot Act man you can tell he'll never stop campaigning.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dave Harrison
Fighting for the little guy!
02:55 PM on 05/13/2011
He does too much, he doesn't do enough. Which is it?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
samtee
Shankapotomus.
03:17 PM on 05/13/2011
He doesn't have a clue what he is doing.
photo
TheBaffler
a long the riverrun
03:48 PM on 05/13/2011
He does too much carrying on expanding Bush's failed and criminal policies, while not doing enough of the things he campaigned on.
photo
Vyslichajici
private american citizen
02:34 PM on 05/13/2011
""This new industry should not be crippled by protectionist measures, so the proposal prevents states from requiring companies to build their data centers in that state, except where expressly authorized by federal law."

wouldn't want to deny the feds a backdoor to our "cloud" now, would we?
photo
Vyslichajici
private american citizen
02:31 PM on 05/13/2011
they always say they are protecting us when they tighten our leashes.
this taxpayer would like to see "homeland security" defunded and disbanded.
no, LOVE to see it. talk about a "big brother state". sheesh.
02:28 PM on 05/13/2011
Having had a 30+ adult career in the technological field. I find it hard to believe that the internet access would die with just a flip of the switch. Business, public, and private concerns all have a hand in its effectiveness. Same with cellphones. Maybe localized areas of stratgic importance. Anyway the terrorists would probably figure it out before we do. They have so much support from foreigners living in our country and from traitorous citizens. We don't need to send suicide bombers to America, just get the president to shut everything off. All our safety infrastructures which we have built into our society suddenly disappear. Well gee. That is just dandy. Anyone know of a good cave to hide in.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
GraniteSkyline
I wish you happiness!
02:25 PM on 05/13/2011
Well the cr@zy has started. I just got an email from my cr@zy SIL warning me that Obama was taking over the internet and going to shut it all down and ki//ing free speech!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Greta42
Let's make the House tea-free in 2014
02:28 PM on 05/13/2011
Oh brother! More scare tactics....
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
PunKinPai
Tact is just not saying true stuff. I’ll pass.
03:07 PM on 05/13/2011
Republicans are the biggest scaredy-cats on the planet. They're afraid of EVERYTHING.
photo
gingerred
Proud lesbian conservative
05:02 PM on 05/13/2011
no that would be the DIMS who willing give up any intrusion on they freedom for the Sake of SAFETY. A Founding Father once said that those who give up freedom for Safety deserve NEITHER!
photo
Thumbody
just for the halibut!
02:05 PM on 05/13/2011
Liar Liar pants on fire!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mrk65
wah, wah, wah...
02:28 PM on 05/13/2011
Yeah, I love Judge Judy too!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:58 PM on 05/13/2011
Really, like the Indiana Supreme court just did?

INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.
In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.
{www.Drudgereport.com}

Guess who's coming to dinner, and it's not an invited guest.
Octavius is removing the facade, enjoy!