John Mellencamp sang about the walls tumbling down and this week's press release by the U.S. Army telling bases to stop blocking Twitter, Facebook, and Flickr Army Allows Access To Social Media Websites should be proof enough for anyone.  Following the US Navy US Navy Web 2.0: Utilizing New Web Tools and the US Air Force's New Media and the Air Force lead, it appears that the US military has realized the value of social media not only as a tool for boosting morale but also "to facilitate the dissemination of strategic, unclassified information." 

Wow.  Who would have ever thought that the stodgy old military would get on board with something so...hip and revolutionary?  What's next, Elvis is really alive and Robert Plant is singing country music (thanks Mike)?  Actually, I'm not all that surprised.  The military has always been out in front with technology, it's just the "non-traditional" stuff like allowing Sailors, Airmen, Soldiers, and Marines to communicate in informal channels using the evolutionary brilliance of user generated content that breaks tradition.  Should we be scared?  I don't think so.  Web 2.0 technologies provide a different means of communicating and distributing information but the risks have always be there, they're just a little more "out there" now.

One thing the military is great at is training and I think they'll be very proactive in making sure members of the military understand their responsibilities when Tweeting, blogging, and posting up on Facebook.  The challenge now will be to instill discipline in communications to everyone, not just those with a security clearance.

While the military is the latest non-traditional organization to publicly endorse social media, throughout government it's become business de jour and it's all about transparency. President Obama's (our) new federal CIO Vivek Kundra built his professional reputation on breaking out of the traditional IT mold and using new technologies to share information with his constituents.  In California, Governor Schwarzenegger has appointed a "New Media Director" to broaden and improve the state's way of communicating with the public.  Across the country, states and local governments are rushing to give the public more of what they want...information, and Web 2.0 technologies are how they are doing it.

Anyone who thinks social media is just a fad isn't paying attention.  It's a trend and it would behoove those of us in the security business to jump on the train and start thinking of solutions to the existing security issues and the new ones that are coming.  If security becomes the party pooper (thanks Dan) on implementation of social media in our organizations, it will be disastrous for our profession.  The horse has already left the barn, we just need to make sure the saddle's tight.  What do you think?

Last Friday, President Obama followed up on a promise he made last July during a speech at Purdue University when, as then-candidate Obama, he said "As President, I'll make cybersecurity the top priority that it should be in the 21st century. I'll declare our cyber-infrastructure a strategic asset, and appoint a National Cyber Advisor who will report directly to me."  In a speech at the White House on Friday morning, President Obama declared that 21^st century challenges can't be met without a digital infrastructure and said that, "the world of cyberspace is a world we depend on every day."  I was encouraged to hear him say that the security of our nation's infrastructure is a matter of America's economic competitiveness.

The President then went on to outline the results of the 60-day review of cybersecurity in the federal government" that Melissa Hathaway and her team completed in mid-April.  The resulting document, titled the Cyberspace Policy Review, is 76 pages of how the federal government is going to take a leadership role in "anchoring and elevating leadership for cybersecurity-related policies at the White House."

While he didn't name the "Cyber Czar" during the press conference, it is the number one item in the "Near-Term Action Plan" of the Cyberspace Policy Review and importantly, the document calls for the White House to lead the way forward.  How's that for leading with your chin?  I also think it was incredibly telling that the President plans to include staff to address privacy and civil liberties.  In fact, he specifically called out that the plan would not include monitoring private sector networks.

What does it mean?  From my view in the cheap seats, I'm ecstatic just to see security getting such high-level visibility.  We've been anticipating the president's actions for a while now and from my perspective, it's very good news to see him follow through.  

I plan to spend some time analyzing the Cyberspace Policy Review document and provide my perspective on it in a few days.  If you've already read and digested it, I'd love to hear your thoughts.

$787B. $787,000,000,000.00. Seven hundred and eighty seven billion dollars. However you say it or write it, that's a lot of dough.  That's the amount of the federal stimulus package called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009.

The mission of the ARRA has several components but one of them is to "address long-neglected challenges".  Many people have been trying to make sure the technical infrastructure we depend upon to keep the lights on, help water flow, keep transportation moving and secure the financial engines in America are considered as some of those challenges. It's no surprise to anyone reading this blog that those are huge issues.  In the early days of the technology revolution we didn't give a lot of thought to security in deploying many of these systems so now we are faced with one of those "long-neglected challenges".

Interestingly enough though, the challenge that many of my colleagues and I face is how to identify the appropriate source and decipher the guidelines for applying, receiving, and executing those very same dollars. Whenever federal funds are involved in such massive amounts, you'd expect a considerable amount of oversight and this case is no exception. With about $19B identified for the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH Act), $7.2B allocated for deployment of broadband and $18.3B for research and development ($580M to the National Institute of Standards and Technology) there is no shortage of issues. In fact, my strategic plan will eventually include a number of enterprise projects that capitalize on these broad categories while benefiting most of the citizens in the state of California. The goal with any of these grant programs is to identify projects with the biggest bang and as broad a scope as possible. In state government that means citizens so I'm looking at projects that can upgrade systems or provide new levels of protection to infrastructures that helps both state and local governments.

I'll let you know how it comes out but if you have any thoughts or suggestions, feel free to throw them my way. I'll be writing more on this topic soon.

I think I can say without stepping too far out on a limb that the details in the article are no apocalyptic revelation to those who are paid to worry about these things.  Weaknesses in the SCADA and control system environment have been known for years and the fact that some bad guys have penetrated and mapped the electrical grid is probably not a great shock.  The fact that it was so publicly presented surely focused the issue in a lot of people's minds though so this problem may inch up the priority scale.

Not that things weren't already being done to fix weaknesses in the nation's power grid but getting such a public stage for the problem will undoubtedly get telephones ringing in legislators offices that may in turn force changes more quickly.   

The choice was made years ago, the first time that the formerly closed SCADA/control system environment was connected to the Internet through some organization's admin network or wireless connection.  That first time, when people began to see the incredible convenience of the Internet in remotely managing the switches, sensors and valves of these widely distributed systems, control was lost.  Now these same systems and networks that security professionals fight to keep secure everyday, the same ones you are reading this blog on right now, with all their warts and weaknesses, are the same ones in many cases being used to manage our nation's critical infrastructures.  Unfortunately, these control system weaknesses have been known for some time but startlingly little has been done to address them.  Pogo said it best.

I always get a little nervous when I see a quote from an 'Official' that cautions, "...the motivation of the cyberspies wasn't well understood, and they don't see an immediate threat."  Well they may be right about the immediate threat part (or maybe not) but as for the motivation part, put on your Mr. Wizard pointy hat for a second.  Just what do you think is the motivation of someone, anyone, who hacks (or waltzes unhindered) into company and government networks across the nation, maps key critical infrastructure system environments and leaves behind little presents that may go boom someday.  Here's a hint, the answer is not tea and crumpets at 2:00.

The good news is that both the government and utilities companies are beginning to take this threat seriously and devote the resources to slowly begin fixing the problems.  In fact, there are many SCADA-related conferences during the year where security issues are beginning to get as much attention as efficiency of service delivery.  While visibility is often a double edged sword, it can also be the catalyst that changes the game. 

While the General approaches the issue from a DoD perspective, I think it translates very nicely to the cybersecurity attitude of both government and society in general.  It's an interesting article and I'll leave it to you to read but I'd like to comment on just one of his points.  In discussing stage three, General Raduege states that "We understand the nature of the threat and the implications for our nation, and there is a growing sense of urgency."

I couldn't agree more that there is a growing sense of urgency.  In fact, we've never heard so much buzz about cybersecurity on a daily basis and it's in the top five priorities of almost all CIO's.  However, my question is whether the right people are experiencing that "growing sense of urgency."  Those of us in the security business certainly get it and there seem to be little flares of interest in government from time to time (usually the result of a data breach or malicious attack that gets headlines) but getting the attention of our policy makers still seems to be a challenge. 

The nation spends $BILLIONS every year on thousands of projects that quite frankly, are of very little interest to, and have very little impact on, the vast majority of Americans.  One man's pork may be another man's job but think about how far even a small percentage of this kind of funding would go in addressing the nation's cybersecurity and critical infrastructure weaknesses at the federal, state and local government levels.  That would benefit the overall population of America far more than some of the small special interest groups on the receiving end of these earmarks.

There are a growing number of national cybersecurity champions, including General Raduege, and I'm excited about the proactive position of President Obama and Representatives Jim Langevin (D-RI) and Michael McCaul (R-TX) but we need more people leaning forward, way forward, on cybersecurity.  This is not a FUD issue and it's our responsibility to clearly communicate the sense of urgency without making it one.  What do you think?

Mr. Beckstrom's announcement has led to some interesting discussions http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9129429&instrc=news_ts_head about whether or not NSA should in fact be playing a lead role in the nation's cybersecurity mission at all. While the technical expertise that resides within NSA is beyond question, in an era of transparency in government, the issue may have some validity when you look at the historically closed environment of NSA.  On the other hand, the national cybersecurity agenda hasn't really made any great strides residing within DHS in the past few years so maybe that isn't a good fit either.  While NSA has received some less than positive press as a "spy agency" over the years, Information Assurance, with a focus on vulnerability and threat analysis, is one of their core missions.

So I suppose the real question is that if a national cybersecurity initiative is truly a national priority, where should the organization directing it live?  Do you think vesting NSA with a leadership role in the nation's cybersecurity effort is the right choice and if not at NSA, where should it be?

A little about me.  I've been in the technology business my entire life and in the cyber security business for the past 17 or so years ... what an exciting ride it's been!  I was a Cryptologist in the US Navy and left active duty in 2001 where my last job was working with the Navy's Computer Network Defense Operations, the Navy Computer Incident Response Team (NAVCIRT), and the Navy Red Team.  Those early days in cyber security were incredible and just in case you're wondering, the Navy has some of the best security professionals in the world as well as an exciting and very relevant mission!  While at the NAVCIRT I met a very smart guy named Stephen Northcutt who was doing some really interesting work at the Navy Surface Warfare Center and building cool IDS tool called Shadow...perhaps you've heard of him?  After I left the Navy I spent a couple years with Raytheon building and running a Security Operations Center and doing some Certification and Accreditation (C&A) work which brought me face to face with the limitations and weaknesses of FISMA (it's not altogether bad, it just has limitations and I'll write more about that in the coming weeks as the Consensus Audit Guidelines (CAG) gets more legs.)

In 2005 I became the State of Colorado's first CISO and had the very enviable task of building the statewide information security program.  Really now, who wouldn't leap at that opportunity?  Governor Bill Owens recognized the significance of an all-encompassing security program and gave me the executive support and resources I needed to quickly establish enterprise security governance.  After Governor Bill Ritter took office in 2007, he raised the ante by hiring Mike Locatis as his CIO to consolidate all IT and security operations in the state.  I loved working with Mike but after three years in Colorado, opportunity knocked again and I moved to California to take over as CISO when Governor Schwarzenegger hired Teri Takai as his CIO to begin revolutionizing IT in the Golden State.  Talk about timing.  I now have the best and most challenging CISO job in the world and look forward to blogging about the exciting things happening in the government cyber security space.

I'm always looking for interesting things to write about so please feel free to post whenever you get the chance and if you have something provocative, let me know.