• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Guest Blogger: Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) on Cyber Security

    sanchez

    Recent cyber attacks against the official websites of the South Korean and American governments have created a new generation of national defense and homeland security issues for the U.S., which we must be ready to meet and defend against in the 21st century. Although the Internet has increasingly brought the world together, it has also added a new layer of threats from terror groups and rogue nations that are building up offensive cyber attack capabilities. Evidence of the crippling effects of cyber attacks was most recently seen during the Russian-Georgian war, when the Russian military shut down critical Georgian government websites in coordination with the ground attack on South Ossetia.

    To protect the U.S. from this new era of cyber threats, Defense Secretary Robert Gates has announced the creation of a new centralized command dedicated to cyber warfare and securing military cyber assets and websites. The U.S. Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM) will employee thousands of “cyber warriors” to combat the growing number of cyber spies from countries like Russia and China that try to infiltrate our military cyber grid and gain intelligence. Although most Americans don’t realize that we’re engaged in daily combat against cyber warfare, these cyber warriors are truly unsung heroes who protect vital military assets oversees.

    The Obama Administration has made revamping and securing our country’s civilian cyber infrastructure a cornerstone in his national security agenda. In recent remarks to the Council of Foreign Relations, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano pointed out the critical role DHS has as the sole protector of civilian government websites, as well as its efforts to help secure the private sector. Unlike the Defense Department, which has thousands of cyber warriors, DHS has only 100 employees dedicated to combating civilian cyber threats and building cyber security plans. With the gap between military and civilian cyber security personnel as large as it is, there needs to be strong government leadership to increase recruitment pools and employ the next generation of cyber leaders that will help and protect our civilian networks.

    Unlike past Administrations, President Obama has also engaged and asked for counsel from crucial yet unconventional communities. This is most noted by the recent appointment of Jeff Moss, founder of the largest conference of hackers held annually, to the Homeland Security Advisory Council. Further, as the ranking female member on the House Armed Services Committee and Vice-Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee, I play a crucial role in making sure the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security have the tools and resources they need to fully defend our civilian and military cyber infrastructure. I believe that these unconventional allies and greater coordination with the private sector will help create a stronger, more resilient cyber security system.

    The views expressed by guest bloggers on the Foundry do not necessarily reflect the views of the Heritage Foundation.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    39 Responses to Guest Blogger: Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) on Cyber Security

    1. Bobbie Jay says:

      Thousands of employees? Greater coordination in the private sector? What are they doing about the cyber attacks and hacks within this country, NOW? Giving them permission to?

      This is clearly another way to set-up and attack Americans. They act like this is something recently discovered. Cyber attacks will happen with the AID OF THIS GOVERNMENT.

    2. Bill San Antonio TX says:

      There is no doubt that Cyber Attacks must be defended against; anyone with a computer would agree with that.

      What people rightfully distrust are promises not kept – the main one being "transparency in government".

      And, it would be great if our representatives would read sweeping legislation that is put together by "staffers".

      Lastly, are these "uncoventional" sources going to be required to pass a background investigation and obtain a security clearance?

      It all comes back to trust. With the formidable far-left fringe who are running this government and represent a distinct minority of the 300 million Americans, how can we believe that this Additional Power will not be abused?

      The millions of people who are finally getting involved are the government checks and balanaces, since the vast majority of the news media is unwilling to do it.

      If you want respect you earn it. If you want trust your earn that. The campaign is over.

    3. Roger D says:

      PLEASE PLEASE DON’T HELP US ANY MORE.

      This will be just another waste of tax payer money and more importantly another layer of the evil empire “more Government”.

      I know that in your mind that you really believe you are helping but, “PLEASE DON”T HELP US ANY MORE”.

    4. Benson, Florida says:

      "as well as its efforts to help secure the private sector."

      Speaking as a member of the private sector, do us all a favor and leave the private sector alone. Take care of your own computers and leave us to take care of ours. The government interferes with our lives far too much already.

      "Unlike past Administrations"

      Translation: Bush Was Bad.

      "President Obama has also engaged and asked for counsel from crucial yet unconventional communities"

      A radical community organizer engaging a hacker to learn how to exert more control over the American population is "unconventional"….how?

      This is just yet another attempt to hand more power and control of the private sector over to the executive branch, disguised as a necessity to protect American cyber security.

      Perhaps Mrs. Sanchez's time would've been better spent actually reading the document she's sworn to uphold. You know, rather than ignoring it at politically-opportune moments in order to hand over more power to her Lord and Savior, Barack Obama.

    5. mary triola new jers says:

      This seems to me just another way of these people trying to control every aspect of our lives. Why are all the idiots from california. What in GODS NAME happened to that state? Va. vote out rockefeller for writing this bill. These people think we are not paying attention or we're stupid.

    6. David, California says:

      I do not support the Rockefeller legislation for the federal government to take over private computers in the name of "national security". The US Constitution states that Congress shall make NO law abridging the freedom of speech or the press…

      The federal government & Congress in particular would be in violation of Article I of the US Constitution if this bill were adopted. As to cyber security, find some conventional outside contractors to stop the hacking. We don't need to hire people with past bad characterto get the job done. Just my opinion.

    7. stephen baron port c says:

      Congresswoman Sanchez …. You cannot be that simplistic. Have you ever heard of a trojan horse? This is the same group of Obama brown shirts that has the motto "never waste a crisis" as their M.O. This is a thinly veiled attempt to deny Americans the right to free speech and the right to free assembly. This will put the Obama administration in the position of shutting down the only open market left for opposing voices. The ability to control information, or disinformation, is crucial to any dictatorship. The communist chinese government routinely denies access to the internet to its citizens? Why? Because it doesn't want it's citizens to have any access to information that might be in counter point to their official policies ,or might not be to the benefit of the communists in Beijing.

      Please stop with the vapid party line.

    8. MaryAnn, USA says:

      If the president wants to protect government computers, fine. Protection is not his goal, anymore than affordable medical care is. He wants control of the American people. It is what governments do, regardless who's running it. It is up to free and well informed citizens to guard their liberty.

    9. jlw indiana says:

      Didn't Iran do something akin to this a couple of months ago to suppress info in and out of Iran?

    10. curt L. Columbus, O says:

      Governent's role is to protect our liberty by dealing with external threats so we don't have to.

      What they propose is to become the external threat to our liberty themselves.

      Add this to the last 9 months of treating our private wealth like a pinata. We need to realize that they are not interested in doing their real job.

      Since they don't listen and will sneak this proposal into soe other bill, if that's what it takes, We need to stop ALL legislation and protect our own liberties from now on.

    11. Tim Az says:

      This dovetails perfectly with the secret personal data being gathered by the Moa-Bama administrtaion at social networking sites on the internet. If you have opposed the One on a social networking site then you should be expecting a siber attack coming to a PC directly in front of you. Compliments of your dear leader Mao-Bama. How's that hope and change working out for you?

    12. Mira says:

      Obama, the Transformer Decepticon, wants to ask council from "as yet unconventional communities"? Who is this Jeff Moss, founder of a conference of hackers? What is his background? What and who are the other "unconventional communities" Obama has engaged?

    13. John, Georgia says:

      Seems like this will dovetail nicely with S.773, The Cyber Security Act of 2009. Is this another quiet step to control the private sector and further reduce our liberties?

    14. Jill, California says:

      This administration's efforts to control the media and the Internet are even more insidious when you look at some of the real problems they are either ignoring or condoning …

      - They're not talking about clamping down on cyber bullies who drive young girls to commit suicide over cruel postings on Facebook.

      - They're not talking about protecting potential victims from would-be killers who use Craig's List to find their prey.

      - They're not talking about protecting young children from pedophiles who prey on kids via the Internet.

      - They're not talking about stopping computer hackers who steal social security numbers, credit card numbers, and so forth.

      - They're not talking about exercising any control over violent movies and video games that inspire others to violence.

      - They're not talking about clamping down on programs like Jackass and America's Dumbest, which encourage unthinking youngsters to imitate dangerous behavior that often leaves them dead or permanently injured.

      - They're not talking about clamping down on the spammers that are choking the rest of us every hour of every day and costing businesses billions.

      - They're not talking about stopping people from engaging in false advertising on the Internet.

      Were they to take care of real problems first, I might believe they're sincere in wanting to protect us from cyber attacks. But as it stands, they have no credibility.

      We need to impeach these treasonous enemies before they destroy America.

    15. wilson,costa rica says:

      if you thought GEORGE BUSH

      was BAD

      obama obama is

      Boogeyman

    16. wilson,costa rica says:

      the boogeyman

    17. Glenn, Arizona says:

      Is this a red herring related to S 778 promising to be able to shut down "non-governmental" internet activity?

      Glenn

    18. Anita says:

      Why try to protect our national security when all they have to do is ask one of the Clintons, they'll give it all away just like they did during the B. Clinton era did with China. How about re-installing our missile defense system if we really want to protect the American people.

      I agree that we need a strong government leadership for this..so lets vote this adminstration out and get one!

    19. HDyke, Montville, CT says:

      Congresswoman Sanchez,

      Isn't typical in name associations, that USA Congress fields people like Tom Ridge and Congresswoman Sanchez in the area of cyber crime,

      I personally was involved in establishing a USA DOD anti cyber crime system, today because of ANAL RETENTIVE VISUAL REACTIONARISM, in other words the supplication to whatever the nation of England puts forward is reactionarily followed we have look alikes in name associations that have effected total impoverishment and servility and attack senarios against those of the USA, like myself who are so clearly USA Constitutionally bound to this nation, that we personally find it a violence to constantly honor and afford only the perspective as if we were VISUAL puppets of a nation that can command its servility from not only itself abroad, though other Contenients and Nations for its own national supremacy, and instead puppets the USA Visual to itself and then binds those of us who are USA people into the commodity that even their foreign nation's Criminal Class need. Our reactionarism, even visually, causes the enslavement of our people to their heirarchy. This is from someone with a name that ms Sanchez, and mr Ridge are visually associated with, and who IS FOREIGN POWER SUPREMACY. Effectively it allows them to commit cybor crime while puppeting US reactionarism.

      I hope this is read by Ms Sanchez, because it is not an affront to her visual nor mr Ridge, it is however an affront to the GANG using visual associations to Puppet the USA.

      Effective slavery because of visual reactionarism to foreign power.

    20. Dennis M Tucker says:

      This is nothing more than a blatant attempt to shut down any dissenting voices. By the way, why does Ms. Sanchez feel compelled to remind us that she is female (4th paragraph). What possible difference could that make? Either way she's still wrong.

    21. Louis L Cesar F Levy says:

      Its even better. Lot of people recognize here another step…So how can't we see that something or someone move them all towards a Goal not their own but his et he is the Enemy who waged this multidimentional war long time ago. Remember Nostradamus:"Mars treatens us with a warlike strenght"? Lets understand that almost everything is used against us:Nature and its elements, our own people starting by the leaders and that ONLY a ferme resolution to Refuse and reject every brick of this edifice can save this country. Start by advocating the STRICT respect and application of its basics Texts. The waves from them are the destruction'rudder.

    22. G-Man, VA says:

      Congresswoman,

      "Ranking female member?" Please, what difference does your gender make? Your article is sound, but you lose credibility with this reader when you add unnecessary gender-political verbiage like "ranking female member." I bet you understand my point!

      Respectfully,

      G-Man

    23. Al, The Villages, Fl says:

      I would suggest that the government set up their communications so that they can operate without using the internet that we use. There is no reason to suggest that they shut down the private sector because of a threat – better they find a way to operate independently from that of the private/public sector. With the trust in the Obama administration diminishing daily, this is not a good time to talk about shutting down the medium that most people use to communicate. Is this another reason such as that used during the financial "crisis" as a basis for the TARP and Stimulus bills to muzzle concerned citizens over the internet? I must be getting paranoid.

    24. NEAL says:

      GREAT…A FREE ENTERPRISE WAR…TURN OUR HACKERS AGAINEST THEIR HACKERS.WE MUST BE BETTER THAN THEY ARE AND SEND A VIRUS TO SHUT DOWN THEIR SYSTEM.OUR GUYS HAVE FUN DOING WHAT THEY SEEM TO LOVE TO DO AND NO ONE GETS KILLED.

    25. nick, los angeles says:

      response to mary triola new jersey:

      not all of us in california are idiots. some of us did not vote for obama and his marxist ideology. that being said, what happened is…. we kicked out a weak governor for a weaker one, we have politicians who court the illegal aliens for their vote and refuse to stop spending money we don't have. people who pay taxes are leaving this state ( i will be following shortly). sanchez is nothing more than a symptom of a larger problem. when it's time to vote, it would help if there were more than one person to vote for (as was the case during the last election for my districts congressman). most of the people here get their news from the state controlled mainstream media and base their decisions on that,and some believe so much of what they are being told that they become enraged at the truth. i live with this everyday, yet i still know better than to fall into the trap of blind obedience demanded by the obama administration. as for the rest, they will get what's coming to them, i think, and i will go down fighting for the country, not the politicians.

    26. Richard, TX says:

      I don't trust the Federal government under this administration to do anything for the benefits of the citizens. The Federal government should take care of their own computer systems and leave the private sector alone. If this administration wants to improve national security, Obama should reinstate the missle shield program and other programs that will keep our defense contractors ahead of our enemies.

    27. ChuckL, Henderson, N says:

      The best thing that could be done for cyber security would be for the federal government to reject all dependency on proprietary software and build secure fiber optic connections for all government facilities. All U. S. Military computers and equpiment must be hardened against Electro-Magnetic Pulse attack.

      All government connections to the public must be done with open source software that is available to all by free download. Anything less is a lockout of some of the citizens of the country from communication with their government.

      But first, the congress MUST restore the production of the F-22 in quantities of not less than 2 per month. Then, as the government has decided that our primary defense aircraft will eventually be the F-35, it is necessary that this single aircraft have an alternate engine certified for use. Our security can NOT afford to be relegated to a single engine that could result in grounding of the entire fleet for a single, but critical, engine failure.

      The shutdown of the Internet within the United States should never be allowed, but I might be convinced that disconnection from the world might be reasonable if we should be subjected to attack. Of course, an EMP attack will render this provision moot.

    28. EDWARD GERSTEN says:

      DOES THIS MEAN ANOTHER CZAR IS TO BE APPOINTED BY THE SUPRIME BEING. ANYTHING THAT THIS PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS WANTS I GET VERY FRIGHTENED ABOUT

    29. Lynn B. DeSpain says:

      It matters not that our enemies way be attacking us while using the phone, the mail, or the internet, or their own homes and apartments! This Nation's Constitution requires that a Warrant be issued prior to listenting in, reading, tapping, or entering, and with cause, by a Judge with whom evidence has been presented for a warrant.

      No President, no Congress has the power to allow anything else. This is in place to protect this Nations Citizens, not our enemies, from intimidation, dictatorship, fascism, and Socialism. This is the reason that all Fifty States need to become Soveriegn States and answerable only to the Untided States Constitution and its Amemndments and not to the idiots and their agendas in Washington DC.

      Hozro

    30. Bob says:

      Another attack on the constitution.I don,t trust this administration.

    31. JAS, Atlanta says:

      Obama takes his cyber cue from Russia/Iran. So if he doesn't like what's being said … guess what!

    32. Allan, Hillside, N.J says:

      I hope the congressperson will read all the comments here and respond. Addditionallly I would like to say that while the left would mouth colmplaints about the Bush administration infriginging on civil rights, Obama is really trying to shut down dissent. The clock is ticcking on blogging!

    33. howard theobald, los says:

      It appears that Ms. Sanchez want more government rather than what the people want. I am confident that Bill Gates and others in his world of computer savy can help protect our computer use and for sure they don't need politicians help-in reality they need his help.

    34. Jules Battlefield, M says:

      It just gets better everyday. Now he wants the power to silence dissent via the internet. I see communisim in our future if this administration is not stopped, now. I agree with Curt L. of Ohio. The only way to stop this mess is let our elected representatives to stop the legislative process in its tracks. Then have every congressman, of any gender, study the document they swore to uphold, the Constitution of the United States of America. Of course, the congressman won't do any of the above. So, the only recourse left to the people of this nation is to remove them from office. Our elected representatives think the people of this country have no spine to do the necessary thing to put this country back together. They may find out differently in the near future if they keep listening to the commies in their midst.

    35. Pingback: InfoBore 40 « ubiwar . conflict in n dimensions

    36. Jerry from Chicago says:

      This is the same administration that now wants to investigate and prosecute employees of the CIA, who were trying to protect us after 9/11. Let's gut the CIA so we can build an army of hackers, to look for other hackers. Perhaps we could have another "Czar", a "Hacker Czar".

      While I would agree that we need to protect national security from cyber terror, I think it's best to let the CIA and the Department of Defense handle this. I am strongly opposed to giving this, or any other president, the right to seize control of the Internet in the event of "national emergencies". It is to easy to rationalize an event as being a "national emergency".

    37. Pingback: Rep. Loretta Sanchez pretends to get technical

    38. Bruce Carleton, Berk says:

      I'm personally glad to see the creation of USCYBERCOM. I think it will help unify the presently fragmented efforts of the military services. As for the other comments about USCYBERCOM being used to control the country or be wasted effort, I disagree. USCYBERCOM is only part of the larger push of addressing national cyber security. It's focus will be on national defense and it will be subject to oversight, just as the rest of the military is.

    39. BadGirl45 says:

      Of course, being scooped is always a risk with research projects. ,

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×