Re: [funsec] WTF? Cyber bill to put US in charge of global cyber security
Name and shame, yes, that'll work. On Wed, 8 Feb 2012, Paul Ferguson wrote: Cyber bill to put US in charge of global cyber security Matthew Hall February 9, 2012 - 12:18PM In the wake of the SOPA outcry, another controversial bill that puts the US in charge of global cyber dealings is simmering. While industry and public uproar has stalled the controversial online anti-piracy bills known as SOPA and PIPA, American legislators are maintaining an aggressive stance on cybercrime, preparing to vote on a new bill that, if passed, will force other countries to play by US rules. The bill - International Cybercrime Reporting and Cooperation Act - is likely to go to a vote in the next few months. It will place the United States at the forefront of the battle against international internet-driven crime by threatening economic sanctions on countries that allow cyber attacks to originate on their soil. The issue of cyber security is so vital right now to US national security and to the United States economy, said Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a co-sponsor of the proposed bill. It follows a change of heart from legislators on the earlier Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and its cousin, the Protect International Property Act (PIPA), whose opposers say go too far in giving US law makers the power to bring down websites, effectively censoring the internet. The bill, 18 months in the making, will establish international protocols on the issues surrounding cybercrime, allow the US government to name and shame lax governments, and establish a framework for economic sanctions on uncooperative governments. Right now, there is no protocol, Gillibrand said. There is no way to call the Russian government and say 'You've got five guys sitting in a room over there who keep attacking our stock exchange what are you going to do about that?' We want to give incentives for countries that need our help, for countries that don't have a way to prosecute cyber crime, or to investigate these cases. Speaking before an audience of law enforcement officials, industry insiders and academics in New York City recently, Gillibrand said a personal fear was for a talented hacker to sell his skills to terrorist groups. If countries that are players in this issue don't participate or don't actually try to enforce laws against cyber criminals we could have sanctions in terms of multilateral banking finance or we could have sanctions that would limit or suspend preferential trade programs. We could also suspend, restrict, or withdraw foreign assistance. Unsurprisingly, law enforcement officials have welcomed the bill. FBI Special Agent Mary Galagin, head of the agency's Cyber/Special Operations Division, believes technology is in danger of outrunning the legal framework applying to her office. If we continue to increase the technology in the United States but legislation does not increase, then law enforcement will get to a point where we will go dark, Galagin said. We cannot get the information we need to stop a terrorist attack, espionage, criminal attacks. You can do a lot more harm to our country right now with a computer than you can with a lot of other weapons. It is kind of like the Pirates of the Caribbean out there. There are pirate ships. There is lots of gold. People are going for it. While terrorism and espionage is one focus, companies including Facebook and MasterCard support the bill in the face of an added twist their interest in protecting private customer data from compromise. Chris Sonderby, Facebook's Associate General Counsel who oversees the company's global law enforcement relations, believes it's in the interest of private companies to partner with law enforcement agencies to protect customers as much as themselves. People demand a level of security, said Sonderby, whose company holds data on over 800 million active users. Those companies that don't protect information are those that people are going to be uncomfortable sharing with or they're not going to use. There are powerful market incentives to make sure that companies you entrust information to have taken adequate steps to protect that data. That's a similar philosophy Senator Gillibrand is hoping US lawmakers can apply internationally in the next few months, after the US took the unprecedented step of naming Russia and China as a safe havens for criminal activity in the internet. We have to elevate the issue, she said. This bill won't dictate what laws Russia should enforce. It just asks Russia to care. http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/security-it/cyber-bill-to-put-us-in-charge-of-global-cyber-security-20120209-1rmuk.html - ferg ___ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Re: [funsec] WTF? Cyber bill to put US in charge of global cyber security
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:55:18 PST, Paul Ferguson said: Chris Sonderby, Facebook's Associate General Counsel who oversees the company's global law enforcement relations, believes it's in the interest of private companies to partner with law enforcement agencies to protect customers as much as themselves. People demand a level of security, said Sonderby, whose company holds data on over 800 million active users. Those companies that don't protect information are those that people are going to be uncomfortable sharing with or they're not going to use. There are powerful market incentives to make sure that companies you entrust information to have taken adequate steps to protect that data. A Facebook representative said all that with a straight face? Reallly? A *FACEBOOK* rep? :) pgpcU7fYlnIWA.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
[funsec] WTF? Cyber bill to put US in charge of global cyber security
Cyber bill to put US in charge of global cyber security Matthew Hall February 9, 2012 - 12:18PM In the wake of the SOPA outcry, another controversial bill that puts the US in charge of global cyber dealings is simmering. While industry and public uproar has stalled the controversial online anti-piracy bills known as SOPA and PIPA, American legislators are maintaining an aggressive stance on cybercrime, preparing to vote on a new bill that, if passed, will force other countries to play by US rules. The bill - International Cybercrime Reporting and Cooperation Act - is likely to go to a vote in the next few months. It will place the United States at the forefront of the battle against international internet-driven crime by threatening economic sanctions on countries that allow cyber attacks to originate on their soil. The issue of cyber security is so vital right now to US national security and to the United States economy, said Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a co-sponsor of the proposed bill. It follows a change of heart from legislators on the earlier Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and its cousin, the Protect International Property Act (PIPA), whose opposers say go too far in giving US law makers the power to bring down websites, effectively censoring the internet. The bill, 18 months in the making, will establish international protocols on the issues surrounding cybercrime, allow the US government to name and shame lax governments, and establish a framework for economic sanctions on uncooperative governments. Right now, there is no protocol, Gillibrand said. There is no way to call the Russian government and say 'You've got five guys sitting in a room over there who keep attacking our stock exchange – what are you going to do about that?' We want to give incentives for countries that need our help, for countries that don't have a way to prosecute cyber crime, or to investigate these cases. Speaking before an audience of law enforcement officials, industry insiders and academics in New York City recently, Gillibrand said a personal fear was for a talented hacker to sell his skills to terrorist groups. If countries that are players in this issue don't participate or don't actually try to enforce laws against cyber criminals we could have sanctions in terms of multilateral banking finance or we could have sanctions that would limit or suspend preferential trade programs. We could also suspend, restrict, or withdraw foreign assistance. Unsurprisingly, law enforcement officials have welcomed the bill. FBI Special Agent Mary Galagin, head of the agency's Cyber/Special Operations Division, believes technology is in danger of outrunning the legal framework applying to her office. If we continue to increase the technology in the United States but legislation does not increase, then law enforcement will get to a point where we will go dark, Galagin said. We cannot get the information we need to stop a terrorist attack, espionage, criminal attacks. You can do a lot more harm to our country right now with a computer than you can with a lot of other weapons. It is kind of like the Pirates of the Caribbean out there. There are pirate ships. There is lots of gold. People are going for it. While terrorism and espionage is one focus, companies including Facebook and MasterCard support the bill in the face of an added twist – their interest in protecting private customer data from compromise. Chris Sonderby, Facebook's Associate General Counsel who oversees the company's global law enforcement relations, believes it's in the interest of private companies to partner with law enforcement agencies to protect customers as much as themselves. People demand a level of security, said Sonderby, whose company holds data on over 800 million active users. Those companies that don't protect information are those that people are going to be uncomfortable sharing with or they're not going to use. There are powerful market incentives to make sure that companies you entrust information to have taken adequate steps to protect that data. That's a similar philosophy Senator Gillibrand is hoping US lawmakers can apply internationally in the next few months, after the US took the unprecedented step of naming Russia and China as a safe havens for criminal activity in the internet. We have to elevate the issue, she said. This bill won't dictate what laws Russia should enforce. It just asks Russia to care. http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/security-it/cyber-bill-to-put-us-in-charge-of-global-cyber-security-20120209-1rmuk.html - ferg -- Fergie, a.k.a. Paul Ferguson fergdawgster(at)gmail.com ___ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
