President To Sign Executive Order On Cybersecurity Info Sharing

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The White House has announced that the president will sign an executive order to promote sharing of information on cybersecurity threats between the private sector and the government.

Today, President Obama will sign an Executive Order to encourage and promote sharing of cybersecurity threat information within the private sector and between the private sector and government. Rapid information sharing is an essential element of effective cybersecurity, because it enables U.S. companies to work together to respond to threats, rather than operating alone. This Executive Order lays out a framework for expanded information sharing designed to help companies work together, and work with the federal government, to quickly identify and protect against cyber threats.
Click to expand...
 
Gotta love our president who leads by executive order. What happened to having to go through Congress and the House. SMH
 
Are they going to get rid of Homeland Security? They should. They're about as useful as a handful of _________.
 
Unfortunately the Congress is partly to blame for this. There have been several incidents since he was elected/re-elected where common-sense measures and/or normal bi-partisan bills were intentionally derailed because they do not like the president. The president has not made things any better as he has openly stated his will to use executive orders in spite of the will of the people/Congress. The hope and change, compromise, transparency, etc. that we were fed during the campaign in '08 never materialized, but it is also not entirely his fault.
 
MrBooMY said:
Gotta love our president who leads by executive order. What happened to having to go through Congress and the House. SMH
Click to expand...
Yeah, damn early 20th century tyrants!

vpJPJY3.png


Modern era, including Obama, not so much.
 
MrCaffeineX said:
Unfortunately the Congress is partly to blame for this. There have been several incidents since he was elected/re-elected where common-sense measures and/or normal bi-partisan bills were intentionally derailed because they do not like the president. The president has not made things any better as he has openly stated his will to use executive orders in spite of the will of the people/Congress. The hope and change, compromise, transparency, etc. that we were fed during the campaign in '08 never materialized, but it is also not entirely his fault.
Click to expand...

I do wonder though if our country would have been better off not passing any new bills at all. (Other than the bare minimum necessary budget bills and the keep (blank) law in effect type stuff)
 
Parmenides said:
I do wonder though if our country would have been better off not passing any new bills at all. (Other than the bare minimum necessary budget bills and the keep (blank) law in effect type stuff)
Click to expand...
Parmenides for president!
 
Good grief, put Obama and executive order in a sentence and watch some people spray themselves with lighter fluid and then strike a match. An executive order could just be a pizza order. There's nothing legally binding about this particular order, it's just a suggestion. Like the suggestions that have been made by government about encrypting personal information that companies ignore left and right.
 
MrCaffeineX said:
Unfortunately the Congress is partly to blame for this. There have been several incidents since he was elected/re-elected where common-sense measures and/or normal bi-partisan bills were intentionally derailed because they do not like the president. The president has not made things any better as he has openly stated his will to use executive orders in spite of the will of the people/Congress. The hope and change, compromise, transparency, etc. that we were fed during the campaign in '08 never materialized, but it is also not entirely his fault.
Click to expand...

Of course it is. He hasn't just started acting this way, He's been acting this way since the beginning. It's just that he had the backing of a Democratic Majority in both houses that allowed him to exercise his will in their name and now he has been disallowed this illusion and so operates through executive fiat. The difference now is that Congress is able to stand up to him whereas before all they could do was try to derail his actions.
 
Parmenides said:
I do wonder though if our country would have been better off not passing any new bills at all. (Other than the bare minimum necessary budget bills and the keep (blank) law in effect type stuff)
Click to expand...

Having experienced the downside of the ACA personally, I am inclined to agree. When I was typing my prior point, I was thinking specifically about the Farm Bill, which historically never has trouble passing, especially since Big Ag donates so heavily to both parties and is probably the most effective, least-known lobby group in the country. The sequester also came to mind.

The current sentiment is that this is the worst administration in history, though there are still plenty that would argue that it is no worse than the prior administration. I suspect that as long as the country is around long enough, neither George W. Bush nor Barack Obama will be viewed as anything more or less than average presidents (alright, maybe slightly worse than average). Right now their reputations simply have the benefit/misfortune of being so immediate.
 
heatlesssun said:
Good grief, put Obama and executive order in a sentence and watch some people spray themselves with lighter fluid and then strike a match. An executive order could just be a pizza order. There's nothing legally binding about this particular order, it's just a suggestion. Like the suggestions that have been made by government about encrypting personal information that companies ignore left and right.
Click to expand...

This is not the full truth. This executive order will serve as justification for new regulation as DHS is charged to head this thing up and make it all happen. Yes business can't be forced to comply but at the same time the offers of immunity from civil liability will be too good a carrot to turn down. They are buying off the businesses with promises that the Government will shield them from civil liability just like they did with the SAFETY Act. This is the absolute worst form of government encouragement imaginable. I don't understand how you don't see it. But hey, it's only Republicans that offer deals to protect big business from the little people right?
 
lcpiper said:
This is not the full truth. This executive order will serve as justification for new regulation as DHS is charged to head this thing up and make it all happen. Yes business can't be forced to comply but at the same time the offers of immunity from civil liability will be too good a carrot to turn down. They are buying off the businesses with promises that the Government will shield them from civil liability just like they did with the SAFETY Act. This is the absolute worst form of government encouragement imaginable. I don't understand how you don't see it. But hey, it's only Republicans that offer deals to protect big business from the little people right?
Click to expand...

Please point to where in this order is this liability shield. Plus how can an executive older do that? Sure the feds may not prosecute a company that suffers a data breach if that company is cooperative but that's that not a shield from civil action which would likely come from the state level anyway.
 
heatlessun you haven't been keeping up with the SAFETY Act have you? The idea is simple, they, (Congress), modified the SAFETY Act and added language that basicly says if a business signs on to the Act and keeps their systems in compliance with Federal IA guidelines, allows the Fed to scan their systems periodicly to ensure compliance, and shares information with the Fed about cyber-attacks they have experienced,etc, that they can not be held liable in civil court for a breach. This executive order goes further and says that they also can't be held liable if they share information/data related to the breach in regards to the customer's of the business.
The Executive Order also complements the Administration’s January 2015 legislative proposal, and paves the way for new legislation, by building out the concept of ISAOs as a framework for the targeted liability protections that the Administration has long asserted are pivotal to incentivizing and expanding information sharing.
Click to expand...
The Feds seem to feel that unless they provide protections to business from Civil Liability in the case of data sharing that they will never get business to play along.

If you don't think Executive Orders have legal "Teeth" then I think you don't know much about Executive Orders.
 
pxc said:
Yeah, damn early 20th century tyrants!

vpJPJY3.png


Modern era, including Obama, not so much.
Click to expand...

Read that slide closely, Obama's numbers reflect that he is only just getting started, he still has two years to go and Republicans just gained control of both houses January this year.
 
lcpiper said:
Read that slide closely, Obama's numbers reflect that he is only just getting started, he still has two years to go and Republicans just gained control of both houses January this year.
Click to expand...
According to that slide, that's the rate per year up to October 2014 when it was created. It covers a period of almost 6 years.
 
lcpiper said:
If you don't think Executive Orders have legal "Teeth" then I think you don't know much about Executive Orders.
Click to expand...

An executive order isn't at all the same thing as law. I never said executive orders can't have legal force, but this particular one doesn't in and of itself. The SAFETY act is another matter.

As for the torte issue, here's the thing coming from the perspective of someone working at a mega bank which has a huge stake in this issue. When institutions do suffer a breach I think most would agree that the public wants a good deal of transparency and even cooperation among other private institutions and god forbid even government. Just like software vulnerabilities, getting the information out there to customers within reason and getting cooperation between companies is better than sweeping things under the rug.

I think that companies will be much more willing to work these things out if they have some legal protections, otherwise they're likely to be far less forthcoming about revealing information that could be used against them in a court of law. That's not to say that we should protect incompetence and negligence but shit happens even when you're careful.
 
Any time a president does or doesnt do something and it is announced, rest assured that charts and graphs will follow.
 
aardvark sandwich said:
Hey asshole - we don't need data sharing, we need better security.
Click to expand...

And wouldn't better security be promoted by sharing information and details about the nature of attacks that institutions are seeing? I guarantee that many institutions are hiding a lot of the details behind how they are getting hacked.
 
I still don't understand how we don't have distributed honepot bot nets behind packet sniffing firewalls that don't let the attacks go out. What they do allow is the packets to come in to give the bots their marching orders. Distribute this and use it to forecast future attacks. I mean seriously. I guess it is expensive to set up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top