Obama’s Cybersecurity Speech: Why Bother?

From TIME national security/intel correspondent Bobby Ghosh

It was a case of cyber-hooey and cyber… who? After a 60-day review of the nation’s cybersecurity policies, followed by a six-week turf war over which department should guard the nation in cyberspace, President Obama’s speech today was disappointingly long on generalities by short on specifics. Revealing Washington’s worst-kept secret, the President announced that he was creating the position of a “Cybersecurity Coordinator” in the White House. But he didn’t name his choice for the job, and didn’t offer a timeline on when a choice would be made.

It’s been known for months that Obama would appoint a cyberczar; speculation in recent weeks has centered on Melissa Hathaway, who conducted the 60-day review and was President Bush’s go-to person on cyberstuff. Obama acknowledged her work, but went no further. Much of Obama’s speech was taken up in stating the obvious: that cybersecurity is vitally important, that responsibility is currently distribute diffusely across too many government departments, that there needs to be better government-business collaboration. But it’s unclear how the new cyberczar will help cut through the bureaucracy when they will themselves be answering to two masters: the National Security Council and the National Economic Council. Obama promised his pick would have “regular access to me,” but the fact that the czar won’t report directly to the President will greatly undermine their ability to do battle with the DHS, the NSA and any number of other departments that have a finger in the cyberpie.

It’s worth remembering here that the Bush administration had a cyberczar, too: Silicon Valley entrepreneur Rod Beckstrom. But Beckstrom quit as Director of the National Cybersecurity Center in March, citing interdepartmental politics. Meantime, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-West Virginia) and Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) have introduced legislation to create a national cybersecurity adviser who WOULD report directly to the President.

What we need here is some cyberclarity.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Ben Garvin / The New York Times / Redux

    Political Pictures of the Week, Feb. 4-10

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Romney: I Was A 'Severely Conservative' GovernorHuffPost Politics

    Jim Bourg / Reuters

    At CPAC, Romney Stresses Conservative Credentials

    Three days after a trifecta of losses underlined lingering questions about his ability to win over the Republican Party’s base, Mitt Romney arrived at CPAC to allay skeptics’ fears. Throughout his second bid for the GOP nomination, Romney has made his business bona fides the centerpiece of his candidacy. But on Friday, before a packed room at the annual conservative confab, he sought to emphasize the record he compiled in Massachusetts. “I was a severely conservative governor,” he told the crowd. “I know conservatism, because I have lived conservatism.” 

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Can we speculate that something came up during the vetting process of Obama’s pick and rather than cancel the speech, he decided to proceed with what he had so far?
    .
    Of course I’ll be satified with the current level of cybersecurity if it simply assures us that the White House won’t be routinely losing official e-mails.

  • Emil

    “From TIME naitonal security” Naitonal?? Geez, people.

  • Cliff

    What we need here is some cyberclarity.
    .
    Ghosh, that’s clever.

  • rubypanther

    As a programmer and systems administrator I can say I am happy he didn’t offer more specifics at this point.
    .
    These are important issues, and I’d rather him take his time, focus on the more immediate issues of jobs, health care and war. Computer security needs an overhaul, but it’s not immediate and rushing it would not fix the problems. Rushed, half-assed approaches to these problems that tried to just throw some money at some “experts” is why we have the security problems we have. Systemic change needs to be thoughtful.

  • http://securitydebrief.adfero.com/obamas-cybersecurity-speech-why-bother/ Obama’s Cybersecurity Speech: Why Bother? | Security Debrief – a blog of homeland security news and analysis

    [...] Obama’s Cybersecurity Speech: Why Bother? – Swampland – TIME.com It was a case of cyber-hooey and cyber… who? After a 60-day review of the nation’s cybersecurity policies, followed by a six-week turf war over which department should guard the nation in cyberspace, President Obama’s speech today was disappointingly long on generalities by short on specifics. var addthis_pub = "";Print this article [...]

  • http://securitydebrief.adfero.com/obamas-cybersecurity-speech-why-bother/ Obama’s Cybersecurity Speech: Why Bother? | Security Debrief – a blog of homeland security news and analysis

    [...] Obama’s Cybersecurity Speech: Why Bother? – Swampland – TIME.com It was a case of cyber-hooey and cyber… who? After a 60-day review of the nation’s cybersecurity policies, followed by a six-week turf war over which department should guard the nation in cyberspace, President Obama’s speech today was disappointingly long on generalities by short on specifics. var addthis_pub = "";Print this article [...]

  • http://leonardomusumeci.net/2009/06/01/obamas-cybersecurity-speechil-discorso-di-obama-sulla-sicurezza-cibernetica/ Leonardo Musumeci » Blog Archive » Il discorso di Obama sulla sicurezza cibernetica

    [...] ho già detto, tutti  meritano di essere letti. E qui ci sono ancora ulteriori [...]

  • http://ubiwar.com/2009/06/02/infobore-ii/ InfoBore II « ubiwar . conflict in n dimensions

    [...] Obama’s Cybersecurity Speech: Why Bother? – Bobby Ghosh, Time [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus