| Home President's
NSTAC Meetings May
2000 Industry
Executive Subcommittee Report to the President's NSTAC
NSTAC XXIII Meeting - May 2000
Industry
Executive Subcommittee Report to the President's NSTAC.
Remarks of Guy Copeland, Industry
Executive Subcommittee Working Group Chairman, the President's National
Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC), before the
NSTAC Business Session, Colorado Springs, Colorado May 16, 2000.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman [Van B. Honeycutt] and good
morning ladies and gentlemen. I am pleased to brief you on the work
of your Industry Executive Subcommittee from this past NSTAC cycle.
We have been busy this past year. Major key issue areas continued
from previous cycles representing an important and significant work
in progress level of effort.
During this presentation, I’d like to present
a high-level overview of our activities since the last NSTAC XXII
meeting and highlight the recommendations to the President in the
reports you recently approved. I will also note some of the issues
and activities that continue to call for NSTAC attention and participation.
Before addressing these key issues and activities,
I’d like to acknowledge the contributions of the IES members
and their industry and government colleagues this past cycle. In
addition to the IES members shown on this slide [slide not available],
there are many other contributors to our work from both the public
and private sectors.
Each report to NSTAC XXIII contains a complete list
of the members and participants who contributed to the work this
cycle. We couldn’t have completed this work without their
commitments and contributions. Perhaps just as important to the
success of your NSTAC, as are the formal reports, is the participation
of your Industry Executive Subcommittee and other representatives
in various forums NSTAC is addressing.
The nature and extent of IES work has changed dramatically
in the last few cycles. We have continued our longstanding partnerships
with key organizations, including the National Coordinating Center
for Telecommunications [NCC] and the Network Security Information
Exchange[s] [NSIEs].
In addition, NSTAC member representatives have responded
to an unprecedented number of Government requests to participate
and share information with such important fora as the Partnership
for Critical Infrastructure Security, a cross-sector coordinating
effort for which Mr. Richard Clarke of the National Security Council
and Mr. John Tritak of the Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office
deserve credit.
Also, the Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office
itself. The President’s Council on Year 2000 convergence,
the National Infrastructure Protection Center led by Mr. Mike Vatis,
the Education and Awareness Committee so ably chaired by the Department
of Commerce. The efforts of the three Information and Communication
Sector Coordinators, the Information Technology Association of America
[ITAA], the United States Telecom Association [USTA], and the Telecommunications
Industry Association [TIA].
The Cyber-Citizen Partnership Initiative with the
Department of Justice which has Attorney General Janet Reno’s
personal attention started in NSTAC sponsored by Government and
industry donations and managed now by the Information Technology
Association of America. The partnership has early initiatives aimed
at cyber ethics education for young people, an information security
resources directory, and a Government-industry exchange program.
The Security, Privacy and Infrastructure Committee
of the Federal Chief Information Officer Council, co-chaired by
Mr. Fernando Burbano of the Department of State, Mr. John Gilligan
of the Department of Energy, and Mr. Roger Baker of the Department
of Commerce, and numerous other industry and Government organized
fora and initiatives such as the Federal Communications Commission’s
Network Reliability and Interoperability Council and the Government
Emergency Telecommunications Service User Council, and most recently,
the United States Space Command.
In response to the dramatic changes expected of the
IES, we held a facilitative brainstorming and team building session
in Denver, Colorado in August of 1999. Mr. John Lofstedt, the IES
representative from US WEST, volunteered to lead the team effort.
Dr. Anthony Ypsaro of Meridian Associates in Denver ably met the
challenge of facilitating our rather eclectic group.
At the off-site meeting we affirmed this vision and
focused on prioritizing the work this cycle so we could continue
to provide the President advice on National Security and Emergency
Preparedness issues or NS/EP issues surrounding the telecommunications
and related information systems marketplace today.
After the off-site, Dr. Ypsaro, supported by the Office
of the Manager of the National Communications System continued to
help as our conscience and guide. I’d like to thank the companies
and the representatives that made a special effort to contribute
to improving the IES and prioritizing our focus.
Based on our off-site meeting and follow-on discussions,
we focused on the following key issue areas this past cycle: Network
security, the impact of network convergence on NS/EP, globalization
and Information Sharing for critical infrastructure protection initiatives.
A common thread ties each of these issues together. They each pose
numerous challenges to industry and Government decision-makers as
they adapt to rapid changes in networks, technologies, globalization
and the role of e-commerce. The NSTAC reports address those challenges
particularly as they pertain to NS/EP communications and related
information systems.
This cycle, the IES began the study of the focus of
Government efforts to enhance the security of the Nation’s
telecommunications and information technology systems that support
NS/EP activities. The IES reviewed how resources are currently allocated
among four basic components of network security -- prevention, detection,
response and mitigation.
The question that we sought to answer was, "Could
shifting the focus among the four components increase the overall
level of network security, and if so, what would the optimal focus
be? The research showed that the amount and focus of network security
resources varies significantly by organization, both in Government
and industry, and are dictated by the unique circumstances of each
network.
Subsequently, we concluded it is essential that each
organization develop its own optimal focus of network security efforts
based on its mission and the criticality of each network within
the organization. Toward that end, it is crucial that network security
be considered an integral part of the enterprise architecture and
in all stages of the system’s life cycle.
In addition, the report emphasizes the importance
of formal training as a critical component of network security.
The lack of trained professionals significantly impedes an organization’s
security policy and renders it vulnerable in the security planning
and implementation process.
And finally, while security policy is not one of the
four components, it clearly emerged from our research as a critical
factor in how organization’s focused their network security
efforts. Each entity we interacted with indicated that security
policies were not generally flexible enough to cope with changing
architectural definitions of security, the dependence on commercial
off-the-shelf products, and growing threat profiles.
At NSTAC XXII, then Deputy Secretary of Defense, the
Honorable John Hamre, discussed the need for open dialog between
industry and government in the current era of dynamic, technological
change. Dr. Hamre requested the NSTAC’s assistance to tackle
the much deeper and more complicated problem, which is how to embed
security in depth in the infrastructure.
We subsequently began to scope this issue to determine
how to respond to Dr. Hamre’s request. The scoping effort
concluded that NSTAC can help in two distinct ways. First, promote
the Federal Government’s efforts to work with industry to
accomplish their mission of incorporating electronic commerce into
their operations and individual support and participate in existing,
successful industry and government fora such as the Information
Assurance Technical Framework Forum.
Also, in the area of network convergence as a follow-on
to the NSTAC 22 Internet Report, we reviewed the implications of
network convergence on existing NS/EP priority services and examined
the evolving capabilities in the Next Generation Network.
For the purposes of this report, we defined "network
convergence" as the process currently underway during which
traditional circuit-switched networks and Internet protocol or IP-based
data networks co-exist and inter-operate. This process is expected
to continue until IP-based networks subsume circuit-switched networks.
In particular, we found that network convergence will have a significant
impact on NS/EP and NS/EP services such as the Telecommunications
Service Priority or TSP program and the Government Emergency Telecommunications
Service or GETS.
To adequately plan for network convergence the report
recommends that the President direct the appropriate Departments
and Agencies in coordination with industry, to determine as soon
as practicable, precise functional NS/EP requirements for convergence
and the Next Generation Network and ensure that relevant NS/EP functional
requirements are conveyed to standard bodies and service providers
during quality of service standards development and implementation.
Because of the impact of the changing telecommunications
environment on NS/EP communications the IES devoted a significant
amount of resources to issues surrounding globalization. Since the
last NSTAC meeting, we concentrated our globalization efforts on
NS/EP issues related to foreign ownership of critical communications
systems, technology export policies, and the Global Information
Infrastructure or GII in 2010.
We examined the implications of foreign ownership
of critical U.S. public communications facilities on NS/EP services.
We concluded that the current regulatory structure effectively accommodates
increasing levels of foreign ownership of U.S. telecommunications
facilities and the provisioning of services by foreign companies
while allowing the federal government to retain the authority to
prevent any compromise of national security interests.
We also reviewed technology export policies dealing
with transfer of strong encryption products, satellite technology
and high performance computers. We compiled information about key
technology export issue areas and tracked the implementation of
new export policies and regulations. Additionally, we investigated
the development of guidelines to assist companies in understanding
government approval of technology sales. We concluded that because
technology progresses faster than policy can keep up with it, government
and industry should continue to reevaluate the limits placed on
the export of technologies.
And finally, we postulated the nature of the GII in
2010 and assessed the implications for NS/EP communications. Our
effort focused on the emerging wireline, wireless, and satellite-based
technologies expected in 2010. We concluded that in 2010 NS/EP communications
will be facilitated by new technologies and improved network features.
The GII will provide increased global availability
of broadband communications with satellite communications and wireless
technologies bringing NS/EP communications to less accessible geographic
regions. However, despite the technology forecast for 2010 there
is no guarantee that all central communications capabilities will
be ubiquitously available.
Therefore, the report recommends that the President:
- Direct the appropriate Departments and Agencies
to conduct exercises focused on NS/EP operations that can be expected
to take place to ensure that required high capacity, broadband
access to the GII is available.
- Ensure that NS/EP requirements such as interoperability,
security and mobility are identified and considered in standards
and technical specifications as the GII evolves to 2010 and identify
any specialized services that must be developed to satisfy NS/EP
requirements not satisfied by commercial systems, and regarding
the foreign ownership issue
- Ensure that the review process for commercial
arrangements involving foreign ownership remains adequate to protect
NS/EP concerns as the environment evolves and becomes more complex.
And finally, the IES focused on the role of Information
Sharing for Critical Infrastructure Protection. As the telecommunications
and related information systems environment continues to evolve
at a rapid pace, Information Sharing between effective parties will
be the key component that will help to ensure that NS/EP requirements
are understood and accommodated in new types of networks and that
assets are protected adequately.
This is especially true for critical infrastructure
protection efforts. Information Sharing is a critical component
of the evolving partnership between industry and government to protect
our nation's most critical assets and is embodied in Presidential
Decision Directive 63. PDD 63 charges Government and recommends
industry address the significant challenges posed by threats to
our nation's most critical infrastructures.
The NSTAC and its member companies acting individually,
but informed by NSTAC activities, have played integral roles in
this partnership and other outreach efforts such as the federal
government CIO council and the President's Partnership for Critical
Infrastructure Security.
Throughout the NSTAC XXIII cycle we regularly met
government leaders responsible for PDD 63 implementation to provide
industry analyses and offer feedback from the planning process and
the early drafts of the National Information Systems Protection
Plan. PDD 63 suggested industry establish its own Information Sharing
capabilities known as Information Sharing and Analysis Centers or
ISACs.
Last year NSTAC endorsed the National Coordinating
Center for Telecommunications or NCC as an ISAC for the telecommunications
sector. The NCC, which was established in 1984 as a result of an
NSTAC recommendation, operates as an industry-Government coordinating
facility for NS/EP communications under all circumstances. In our
work with officials responsible for PDD 63 implementation, we shared
lessons learned from the NCC's 16 years of experience and offer
it as a unique model of industry and Government partnership.
As of March 1st, 2000 the NCC formerly incorporated
the ISAC function into its operating capability and is recognized
as one of the first two functioning ISACs. We also assisted in the
establishment of operational Information Sharing efforts between
industry and Government and, in particular, preparations for the
transition to the Year 2000. We found that significant operational
and legal impediments exist that threaten to impede the Information
Sharing process.
Most notably, industry must be assured that sensitive
and proprietary information and voluntarily shared with government
is protected from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
Additional concerns relate to liability, antitrust, security, regulation
and privacy issues. Each of these concerns may require legislation
to protect industry similar to the limited protection passed to
limit liability for Y2K Information Sharing activities.
Therefore, the report recommends that the President
support the development of legislation that would protect critical
infrastructure protection information voluntarily shared by industry.
In particular, from disclosure under the Freedom of Information
Act and consideration of other pertinent barriers to sharing to
limit liability for such sharing.
Based on our work this cycle, the following issues
were identified for consideration in our work plan for next cycle.
These include:
- Continuing to work with key Government leaders
responsible for implementing PDD 63 related activities and sharing
the NCC as a model for other sector ISACs.
- Continuing our study of network security efforts
by Government and industry, and finally,
- Examining the potential NS/EP implications of possible
security and reliability vulnerabilities of the Next Generation
Network.
We look forward to incorporating additional items
for consideration based on your discussions at this afternoon's
at this afternoon's Executive Session. In a successful partnership
as embodied in the NSTAC, there are more outstanding contributors
than can be acknowledged here today. However, I would be remiss
if I did not repeat that the extent of IES involvement with other
organizations has increased tremendously in the last few cycles.
More organizations are engaging us in exchanges of
value to industry and government. Our ability to support this increased
demand is dependent first and foremost on the willingness of the
NSTAC principals to commit the necessary resources. It is equally
dependent on the willingness of many Government organizations to
provide professional participation.
Lieutenant General [David J.] Kelley [Manager, NCS]
can be proud of the support his organization has provided. His new
Deputy Manager, Diane McCoy, her excellent professional staff and
the contract support provided to them by Booz-Allen and Hamilton
to perform outstandingly in a variety of ways. Without their assistance
we could not have the successful partnership that NSTAC represents.
Before I conclude, I would like to thank each
of the Chairs and Vice Chairs who led our task force and group efforts.
I would now like to return the microphone to the Chairman who will
moderate any questions the NSTAC principals may have for us. Thank
you.
Published for internal information use by the
National Communications System. Parenthetical entries are speaker/author
notes; bracketed entries are editorial notes. This material is in
the public domain and may be reprinted without permission.
Questions or comments
concerning this site? Please contact the webmaster.
Privacy
Policy |