Contributor

More questions for DHS. Where is all that money going?

Opinion
May 5, 20083 mins

Ryan Singel over at Wired.com spells out some of the mysterious activity on the part of the US government recently.  Most disturbing to me is the attempt by the NSA to take over cyber surveillance on US citizens. Or rather continue their cyber surveillance of US citizens.

Senators Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) and Susan Collins (R-Maine)  state in a letter to DHS Secretary Chertoff on Friday:

DHS has requested substantial new resources for cyber security, and it is critical that the funds are spent carefully and appropriately. The Department has requested an additional $83 million dollars for the National Cyber Security Division (NCSD) for fiscal year 2009. Including the $115 million that was awarded for the initiative in the FY 2008

omnibus appropriations bill, this would be a nearly $200 million dollar increase, tripling the amount of money spent on cyber security in DHS since 2007.

 I think that means that $300 million is being spent on cyber security within DHS.  That is a lot of money. I wonder where it is going? 

What is really perplexing is evidently DHS plans on spending $30 Billion on cyber security.  Now that is a lot of money.  Keep in mind that that is almost twice the annual market for all security products in the WORLD.

 The senators go on to ask seventeen questions of Mr. Chertoff.  Here is a good one:

For example, on March 20th, you announced that Rod Beckstrom would be the Director of the new National Cyber Security Center (NCSC) within DHS. Prior to this announcement, committee staff had been instructed that the existence of the NCSC itself was classified. Moreover, the Department has yet to publicly disclose very many details on the role of the NCSC beyond the brief press release. To clarify these matters, we renew our request for an unclassified summary of the CNCI – a request made by Committee staff over five months ago. 

Pretty strange behavior to classify the existance of the Cyber Security Center, then announce its leader in a public press release.  

There are lots more unanswered questions.  I think it is important for Congress to realize that good security does not have to be secret.  Just as good encryption algorithms are published and all “secret” methods of encryption are suspect, security measures must be transparent so that they can withstand the scrutiny of overseers and experts.  

Allowing the DHS to keep its cyber security measures secret is a formula for disaster.  

Richard Stiennon is chief research analyst at IT-Harvest, the firm he founded in 2005 to cover the 1,600 vendors that make up the IT security industry. He is the author of Surviving Cyberwar (Government Institutes, 2010) and There Will Be Cyberwar: How the Move to Network-Centric Warfighting Set the Stage for Cyberwar. He is a member of the advisory board at the Information Governance Initiative and principal of TrueBit Cyber Partners. He also serves on the R2-TAC, the technical advisory committee for the Responsible Recycling standard for e-waste.

Stiennon was chief marketing officer for Fortinet Inc. and vice president of threat research at Webroot Software. Prior to that, he was vice president of research at Gartner Inc. He has a B.S. in aerospace engineering and an M.A. in war in the modern world from King’s College, London.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of Richard Stiennon and do not necessarily represent those of IDG Communications Inc. or its parent, subsidiary or affiliated companies.

More from this author