A cyber con game

By Charles Cooper
http://news.com.com/A+cyber+con+game/2010-1071_3-5635833.html

Story last modified Fri Mar 25 04:00:00 PST 2005

In a recent report to President Bush, an advisory task force presented a
damning picture of the nation's information technology infrastructure.

The authors of the study, "Cyber Security: A Crisis of Prioritization," warn
that the current system is "highly vulnerable to attack" and urge a
fundamental rethinking of how the nation's computing architectures and
technologies should get deployed.

Don't get your hopes up. If past is prologue, I think it's safe to assume
that nothing will come of this--until it's too late and people again are
scrambling for answers.

It's tempting to become cynical about so sensitive a subject, but the blunt
truth is that Americans care more the ultimate outcome of "American Idol"
than they do about repairing the nation's IT infrastructure. Outside of the
confines of the security nerds who live and breathe this stuff, most folks
are bored silly by the subject.

The blunt truth is that more Americans care more about the ultimate outcome
of "American Idol" than they do about repairing America's IT infrastructure.
So with no pressure from constituents, the people in charge of the country
have remained complacent even while the security protocols and practices
governing the system fell into disrepair.

Both major political parties shoulder blame. The question of how to shore up
the nation's IT infrastructure first surfaced toward the end of the Clinton
administration. A fat report got published and bureaucrats dutifully made
time for reporters' questions. But fundamental change was postponed for
another day--and another administration.

Cyber-security gained temporary prominence after Sept. 11, 2001, but the
Bush team quickly lost interest. Bureaucratic squabbling and the absence of
real backing from the chief executive have since turned the job of
cyber-security chief into a revolving door post.

Since 2001, the government has casually gone through one cyber-czar after
another and yet you hardly hear a murmur from the political elites. Years
ago I asked a now-retired congressman why so few of his colleagues put a big
effort into technology issues and he gave me one of those "Kid, you must be
from Kansas" smiles. Couldn't I understand that a stem-winder on the floor
of the House of Representatives about IT and its discontents would never get
him onto the evening news?

Sure I could. Unfortunately, when they do start yammering about bits and
bytes in public forums, it's usually for all the wrong reasons.

Since 2001 the government has casually gone through one cyber-czar after
another and yet you hardly hear a murmur from the political elites.
So it is that we were recently treated to the spectacle of three congressmen
who ought to know better making phony calls for a government investigation
into the sale of IBM's notebook business to a Chinese company. It was all
politics for the sake of impressing the voters back home and generated the
desired headlines.

Too bad they didn't also investigate why we're still churning out software
with security holes--and this, six years after a 1999 President's
Information Technology Advisory Committee report first flagged this as a
concern.

In a numbers game, it's all about counting noses. Unfortunately, the natural
constituency in favor of breaking sharply with tradition and doing something
meaningful about cyber security is relatively small (Even a promise of
unlimited brie and chardonnay will not produce any Million Coder Marches on
Washington in our lifetime.) That calls into question one of the key
recommendations in the report: a call to increase the NSF's research budget
for fundamental research by some $90 million.

Unless the president awakes one day to an epiphany, the report will surely
get summarily rerouted to a dusty shelf in a forgotten corridor of a
nondescript department, somewhere deep in the bowels of official Washington,
D.C. Just like so many other do-gooder position papers that wind up ignored
and put aside.

But when the stuff one day hits the fan--as it inevitably will--nobody in
authority will be in a position to claim they didn't know.


Copyright �1995-2005 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.




You are a subscribed member of the infowarrior list. Visit
www.infowarrior.org for list information or to unsubscribe. This message
may be redistributed freely in its entirety. Any and all copyrights
appearing in list messages are maintained by their respective owners.

Reply via email to