-Caveat Lector- -----Original Message----- From: International Justice Watch Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Miroslav Visic Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 3:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Bush calls for background checks of IT professionals (2 articles)
Welcome to the United States of Homeland Security... IT Pros May Face Background Checks ------------------------------------------------------------------------ By DAN VERTON JULY 29, 2002 Washington The Bush administration plans to convene a panel of government and private-sector labor and legal experts to develop guidelines for subjecting tens of thousands of corporate IT and other employees to background investigations. The panel, as described in the president's "National Strategy for Homeland Security" report, released July 16, would be convened jointly by the secretary of Homeland Security and the attorney general following the establishment of a cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security. It would examine whether current employer liability statutes and privacy concerns would hinder "necessary background checks for personnel with access to critical infrastructure facilities or systems." That means employees in industries that include banking, chemicals, energy, transportation, telecommunications, shipping and public health would be subject to background investigations as a condition of employment. "Personnel with privileged access to critical infrastructure, particularly [IT-based] control systems, may serve as terrorist surrogates by providing information on vulnerabilities, operating characteristics and protective measures," the Bush report states. Some IT professionals see the plan as both an infringement on civil liberties and a recipe for destroying innovation and economic prosperity. Jonathan Blitt, president of ITT Industries Inc.'s Network Systems & Services division in New York, said expanding background investigations would do more harm than good. "I [have] great concern with any effort to expand the size of government intervention in commercial operations. The people you most want on your side are the people that may seem least desirable to a panel of so-called experts," Blitt said, referring to the community of programmers and ethical hackers who often live on what he referred to as the "fringe" of society. "This pandering to the masses should stop, and professional reason should start. This plan could put shackles on an industry that is critical to the growth of our country." Others see no problem with the requirement for background investigations. Eric Johansen, a systems analyst at ReliaStar Life Insurance Co. in Minneapolis, is one of those. "Yes, there is added cost, but companies should be doing this anyway as part of standard hiring procedures," Johansen said. "A position like systems analyst [or] network administrator requires access to extremely sensitive data and control of many business-critical tasks. It would be ridiculous not to screen employees. Companies should not need President Bush's push in order for this to happen." Indeed, background investigations are already conducted by many companies that have sensitive or critical positions that are vulnerable to terrorist infiltration, such as airport baggage screeners and air marshals, said Ed Badolato, president of Washington-based Contingency Management Services Inc. Investigations are necessary because they "provide a baseline for preventing known criminals and potential terrorists from working in vulnerable areas," said Badolato, who oversaw some of the government's most stringent and expensive background investigations when he served as deputy assistant secretary for energy emergencies at the Department of Energy. The main challenges facing companies that don't currently conduct detailed background investigations on employees include determining how much of the workforce needs to obtain a security clearance, who will pay for the government-level security investigation and how those clearances will be administered and maintained, said Badolato. Vinton Cerf, senior vice president for Internet architecture and technology at WorldCom Inc., said that while there are benefits to such background checks, they are not a panacea for homeland security. "Given the technical nature of much of the critical infrastructure it seems likely that these investigations will uncover some number of risks that employers were not aware of," said Cerf. However, "I am ambivalent about the ultimate utility of these measures, since compromise of trusted individuals is not something an investigation can prevent." The administration's desire to ensure that employees at critical facilities don't pose a threat could also provide incentive for Bush to establish a chief privacy officer post at the proposed Homeland Security Department. "I think that we are very open to having that discussion," said Steven Cooper, Bush's CIO for homeland security. "I suspect the American public is also interested." Meanwhile, Bush has threatened to veto current legislation that would create the cabinet-level post if Congress doesn't grant him the ability to limit the workplace rights of the 177,000 federal employees who would make up the new department. Bush has argued that current labor laws would limit his ability to manage the department. Critics fear that the administration is seeking a way to deny employees collective bargaining and civil service protections. Source: Computerworld Bush security plan calls for background checks ------------------------------------------------------------------------ By DAN VERTON JULY 22, 2002 WASHINGTON -- Once a cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security is established, the Bush administration plans to convene a panel of government and private-sector experts to determine the legal guidelines for subjecting tens of thousands of private-sector employees to background investigations. The panel -- outlined in the president's National Strategy for Homeland Security released last week (see story) -- would be convened jointly by the secretary of Homeland Security and the U.S. attorney general. It would examine whether current employer liability statutes and privacy concerns would hinder "necessary background checks for personnel with access to critical infrastructure facilities or systems." That means tens of thousands of private-sector employees working in industries such as banking, chemicals, energy, transportation, telecommunications, shipping and public health would be subject to background checks as a condition of employment. Tom Ridge, the current director of the Office of Homeland Security and the leading contender to become Bush's nominee for the cabinet post, said on July 21 that the nation remains at risk from an unknown number of terrorist cells operating within the U.S. And according to the national strategy, that situation could be further complicated by malicious insiders with authorized access to critical facilities. "Personnel with privileged access to critical infrastructure, particularly [IT-based] control systems, may serve as terrorist surrogates by providing information on vulnerabilities, operating characteristics and protective measures," the Bush strategy states. The administration's desire to ensure that employees working at critical infrastructure facilities -- 90% of which are owned and operated by private companies -- could also provide additional incentive for the Bush administration to establish the post of chief privacy officer within the proposed Homeland Security cabinet-level office. "I certainly think that we are very open to having that discussion," Steve Cooper, president Bush's CIO for homeland security, said today. "I suspect that the American public is also interested. I think the dialogue is welcome." But the challenge of conducting background investigations on such a massive scale may be far greater than anybody has acknowledged so far, said Bill Malik, a security analyst at KPMG LLC. "The biggest problem with background checks for folks working on critical infrastructure is the broad use of third parties and contractors involved in the work," said Malik. "The worry at a nuclear power plant is not so much the regular staff but the cleaning crew, the groundskeepers, the caterers and the painters. "And from a law enforcement perspective, it is actually easier to covertly identify a suspicious person and place them under surveillance than it would be to scare such folks off, drive them further underground and then have to wonder what they might be up to from a distance," said Malik. Gary Gardner, CIO at the Washington-based American Gas Association, which represents 187 local companies that deliver natural gas to more than 52 million homes, businesses and industries, said the Bush plan focuses on critical-infrastructure personnel programs and proposes national standards for screening and background checks. "As you can imagine, creating national standards and possibly regulation is not something any industry would like to see," Gardner said. "However, assistance in strengthening programs and the government strengthening their own background checking ability -- with industry being able to take advantage of a national system -- would be welcomed." During a news briefing last week at the White House, Cooper said privacy issues will be one of the five guiding principles used to develop the administration's cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection plan. "Getting the balance right will be a pendulum," he said, referring to the balance between privacy, civil liberties and the need for greater security. "We're not going to get the balance right right out of the box." Source: Computerworld <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
