1 août 2018 | International, C4ISR

Homeland Security announces new first response cyber center

By:

In the face of increasing cyberattacks, the Department of Homeland Security is creating a new center to share threat information with private companies and kicking off a 90 day sprint to identify the country's digital “crown jewels" that may be especially vulnerable, the agency's secretary said July 31.

The National Risk Management Center is expected to provide a centralized home where firms and local agencies can turn for cybersecurity solutions.

“The next major attack is more likely to reach us online than on an airplane,” said Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. She added that “intruders are in our systems” and “everyone and everything is now a target.”

The announcement came during a cybersecurity summit that the Department of Homeland Security hosted in New York City. The event aimed to bridge the gap between the government and some of the top companies in the United States that make up the critical parts of American digital life. It was envisioned as the start of a new relationship between the private and public sector.

Nielsen said that the threat center is “driven by industry needs” and is spurred by a ”re-emergence of the nation state threat” and the “hyperconnected environment” of the United States. She said that previously some local governments have called 911 during a cyberattack. In the future, they would call the new cyber center.

“Nation-state actors attempt to infiltrate critical infrastructure operations across multiple sectors,” a Homeland Security fact sheet on the new center read. It added there is a “need for an agreed-upon playbook to integrate government and industry response efforts.”

The center also provides a playbook for risk management and identifying critical cyber supply chain elements. Although there are already government-backed risk-sharing initiatives, DHS leaders hope that the private sector will be more willing to share their challenges and expertise.

Jeanette Manfra, the assistant secretary for the Office of Cybersecurity and Communications at Homeland Security, told reporters that the new center is "going to start small, we don't want to sign up for all sorts of things and then fail.”

The hope is for the national counterterrorism center to be able to focus on incident response, and the center announced on Tuesday will focus on identifying national risk. The risk center will pull staff from other parts of government, Manfra said. A leader has not been named, and it has not received an increased budget.

Throughout the conference, government officials were eager to entice the private sector to work with the new risk center. It appears that business participation is a necessary condition for the centers' success.

The announcement comes just one week after Homeland Security warned that the Russian government is conducting cyberattacks against critical infrastructure sectors that include energy, nuclear, water, aviation and critical manufacturing.

“The warning lights are blinking red," Coats said during a July 13 event at the Hudson Institute.

Current threat sharing portals have been described as ineffective. The Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 already attempted to spur collaboration between the public and private sector.

Some experts told Fifth Domain that they did not expect the new portal to be groundbreaking.

Only six companies are currently sharing cyberthreats with government, according to Chris Krebs, head of the national protection and programs directorate at Homeland Security.

“We have to age to establish a value proposition for an organization to share into the system,” said Krebs. He highlighted better supply chain risk management as an incentive that would set the new center apart from previous intelligence-sharing schemes.

Companies can write into their contracts that their vendors must use the threat-sharing portal so they know that contractors are managing third-party risks, Krebs said.

At the event in New York City, some of the largest corporations praised the new program while speaking onstage with top government officials.

“This was an obvious thing to do for a decade but it didn't happen,” said John Donovan, the chief executive of AT&T.

https://www.fifthdomain.com/critical-infrastructure/2018/07/31/homeland-security-announces-new-risk-management-center/

Sur le même sujet

  • Memes, the pandemic and the new tactics of information warfare

    27 juillet 2020 | International, C4ISR

    Memes, the pandemic and the new tactics of information warfare

    Mark Pomerleau WASHINGTON — The COVID-19 pandemic is evidence that Russia and China have accelerated adoption of their age-old influence and disinformation tactics to the modern era, national security experts and military leaders said. Those countries are leveraging U.S. laws, social media platforms and divisions within society to their larger strategic advantage and as a way to weaken the United States. “This pandemic crisis has made it very, very clear that Russia, China and others intend to strategically use cyber-enable information operations against the U.S.,” Lt. Gen. Mary O'Brien, deputy chief of staff for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and cyber effects operations, said during a Joint Service Academy Cybersecurity Conference webinar June 11. “They're injecting disinformation, which is not a new concept in itself, but now by incorporating cyber means, they're reaching millions of people to exacerbate existing tensions within the U.S. and between us, our allies and partners.” She said these efforts include spreading conspiracy theories and confusing messages about the virus such as its origins and risks. Such tactics are here to stay. “Our adversaries have made it very clear that this aspect of strategic competition will be enduring,” O'Brien added. These tactics, which include waging influence campaigns below the threshold of armed conflict, have forced the military, and U.S. government more broadly, to rethink its strategies and views toward conflict. Traditionally, the United States government has taken a binary view of war and peace, while adversaries such as Russia in particular have viewed conflict on a perpetual continuum. “In many ways, we have trained ourselves as a service at every Red Flag we've gone to that conflict begins when two fighters engage or we find a target on the battlespace. So we've really trained ourselves that conflict begins at that moment,” Lt. Gen. Timothy Haugh, commander of 16th Air Force, the service's first information warfare command, said at a July 15 Mitchell Institute webcast. Red Flag is the Air Force's premier tactical training event. “Was the first element really when we got into conflict in the information environment ... the first day that one of our companies was hacked that the intellectual property theft of one of our weapon systems stole?” he said. “Was that really when conflict began? Was it the day that Russian hackers hacked into the DNC? Was that really the day that conflict began for our nation and how we should be thinking about it when the adversaries went to another level of using some level of malign activity that is outside of things that we would consider norms.” As such, the military is looking at ways to expose this activity abroad when it can. “Sixteenth Air Force units are focused on developing tactics, techniques and procedures and they're looking to identify, expose and when directed, countering the threat from the state sponsored disinformation campaigns,” O'Brien said. “This is continuing, I think we'll see it again as we address the racial discrimination.” Adversaries have exploited U.S. laws and principles, such as the freedom of speech with online platforms, which makes outright banning accounts difficult. They've also targeted existing divisions within society such as protests over police tactics and racial equality. “[Adversaries] also are in a position where they can take advantage of a lot of the disinformation/misinformation that's created right here at home in the United States by actual Americans who understand the language in a way Moscow couldn't at a native level,” Cindy Otis, vice president of analysis at Alethea Group, a start-up that counters disinformation and social media manipulation. told C4ISRNET. Experts explained that adversaries in many cases don't have to create content, although many choose to. “At the end of the day they're really just amplifying our existing social divisions. We suspect, especially lately, that they've really done enough amplification that they're just kind of allowing things to snowball now ...There's enough existing division that it really only requires tiny nudges at this point to amplify,” Maj. Jessica Dawson, research lead for information warfare and an assistant professor at the Army Cyber Institute, told C4ISRNET. One way they do this is called memetic warfare, which involves sharing memes on various social media platforms to stoke a particular reaction from various groups. “When we think about memetic warfare, what's really happening is we're taking these sort of deep seeded emotional stories and we're collapsing them down into a picture, usually it's something that has a very, very quick emotional punch,” she said. “They're collapsing these narratives down into images that are often not attributed, that's one of the things about memes is they really aren't, someone usually isn't signing them, going ‘I'm the artist.' There [are] these really emotional punches that are shared very, very quickly, they're self replicating in a lot of ways because you see it, you react and then you immediately pass it on.” While many experts noted that these tactics are nothing new, the difference is the internet. “The major change throughout history is today they're able to spread and amplify and reach people where they are all over the world in a way that was never possible before,” Otis, who previously was a CIA analyst, said. Previously, nations such as the Soviet Union had to prop up media outlets and place stories in newspapers around the world hoping they'd be picked up in English language outlets. Now, they just have to tweet. In some cases, they are overt social media channels and actors might not even hide their origin, but other more covert cases, states might use certain influencers or cut outs to do their bidding. What's the point? The goal of these operations varies slightly, but experts said they serve the ultimate purpose of put down the United States compared to their own nations. “For Russia it all goes back to the desire to undermine United States' global credibility but also show their own population ‘hey, you know that democracy you want, it's actually not a great thing ... look how it's turning out for the United States,‘” Otis said. She added that Russia tries to undermine the credibility of the United States on issues such as human rights, something the United States is active in promoting on the world stage, by highlighting social divisions such as potential police brutality and racial injustice. Dawson noted this can also distract from what Russia is doing abroad. Russia also wants to discourage citizens from voting, Otis said by making large swaths of the population feel disenfranchised. Often times, these actors will play both sides of an issue to maximize reach and discord. When it comes to China, Dawson noted that they are trying to appear more benevolent on the world stage to present itself as a world power, which is much harder. They are also good at making information disappear online, she said, citing information on the Tiananmen Square massacre. Otis pointed to Chinese benevolent efforts such as providing medical aid to nations such as Italy during the ongoing pandemic. Combating these efforts, including those focused internally at domestic populations and undermining government, can be difficult given the existing divisions within society and the broad speech freedoms guaranteed. Otis explained that the government can sometimes be mired in its own bureaucratic processes, noting it can be its own worst enemy. She provided the example of Taliban forces in Afghanistan publishing in their media channels that the United States and NATO forces bombed a school killing scores of children. Those stories would go viral in their circles and sometimes make their way to mainstream outlets. When questioned about those claims by reporters, U.S. officials would explain they have to conduct an investigation, which could take months. By the time the investigation is concluded and the claim is found to hold no truth, the damage is already done and the Taliban have successfully recruited against it. Dawson noted that one way to begin combating disinformation is building trust from the local to the national level while also addressing the underlying domestic problems adversaries are exploiting from abroad. https://www.c4isrnet.com/smr/information-warfare/2020/07/23/memes-the-pandemic-and-the-new-tactics-of-information-warfare/

  • Opinion: Six Ways COVID-19 Could Change Defense Sector

    2 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Opinion: Six Ways COVID-19 Could Change Defense Sector

    Byron Callan The coronavirus pandemic is going to be as consequential for defense and security as were the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S. For the defense sector, there are multiple implications to ponder and possibly to begin to position for as these play out in 2021 and beyond. Large contractors should fare relatively well in 2020, compared to other sectors. They will not see the demand destruction that is ripping through commercial aerospace and therefore are unlikely to experience financial duress. That alone may enable them to act strategically and aggressively in 2020 and beyond, although there are risks to weigh as well. Here are six changes to ponder: First, a crisis the size of the COVID-19 pandemic is bound to spawn new government investment and organization to address future outbreaks. The Sept. 11, 2001, attacks led to the formation of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and creation of the position of director of national intelligence. It's fair to assume there will be changes in the wake of the current pandemic. Some contractors already have federal services segments that address U.S. health care. Core skills they can bring are dealing with bureaucracies, technology and regulations. There should be new opportunities in 2021 and beyond from whatever changes are made to improve the national resilience and response to future pandemics. Second, small and medium-size businesses are being stressed. The CARES Act in the U.S. may help somewhat, and changes in Defense Department progress payment rates could be another short-term relief. Large contractors might choose to vertically integrate to improve their fortitude against future shocks. Or there could be further consolidation, particularly of distressed suppliers. A reintegration of defense and commercial aerospace is a third change that might emerge. The Raytheon-United Technologies merger may be a harbinger of this shift. The ramifications of the coronavirus crisis on the air transport and commercial aerospace sectors could lead to structural changes and a need for capital, particularly in commercial aerospace. If valuations remain depressed in 2020-21 in commercial aerospace, there could be more opportunity for defense contractors to reintegrate. A fourth change could be to expectations for contractors. The model for U.S. defense since 1945 has largely been that the Pentagon pays for the bulk of research and development, and contractors can reclaim most of their own research and development as an allowable cost for which they are reimbursed. Operating margins have generally risen, compared to levels evidenced in the 1980s and before, and large contractors have in the last 15-20 years allocated most free cash flow to shareholders. It is conceivable that this model will change in the 2020s. Operating margins may appear to be ho-hum compared to other sectors, but returns on invested capital are attractive. If there is a greater squeeze on the Pentagon budget and demand for security remains steady or increases, this could compel the Pentagon to change expectations for contractor behavior. Could they be expected to take on more contract risk? Will they need to step up their own independent research and development funding or find more creative ways to access and apply technology to national security needs? On the flip side, could there be more emphasis on dual-use technology investment, as occurred in the 1990s, where research and development for defense should have commercial/civil benefits as well? A fifth potential change is in security threats and national defense strategies. Some governments and regimes might come through this crisis with their positions enhanced, having overseen relatively mild disruptions and having been able to achieve quick economic bounce-backs. Others, however, will have failed this test, and they could see new political challengers (in democracies) or be overthrown or consumed by internal unrest from competing forces or mass movements that are emboldened by recent failures. The Middle East remains a likely place for these sorts of changes; Venezuela is another. The civil war in Syria and the fighting in Libya are current examples of how state collapse and regime challenge can drag in outside interests. The U.S. National Defense Strategy that reoriented the Pentagon and contractors toward “great power” competition could be pulled in different directions depending on where fragilities emerge. Some allies may be significantly weakened, and that could bear on U.S. defense planning and export sales. It is not just the coronavirus that matters in this regard; the crash in oil prices is also a factor to weigh. Finally, the coronavirus has turbocharged federal deficits and is sending federal debt to record levels. It may take weeks or months to assess just how much is going to be added, but there will be a fourth and possibly a fifth stimulus package in the U.S. Ultralow interest rates and the urgency of limiting social and economic damage and keeping the health care system functioning make this tolerable. But higher debt raises the risk in the 2020s that if rates increase, interest outlays could weigh on defense. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/opinion-six-ways-covid-19-could-change-defense-sector

  • New Phishing Tool GoIssue Targets GitHub Developers in Bulk Email Campaigns

    12 novembre 2024 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité

    New Phishing Tool GoIssue Targets GitHub Developers in Bulk Email Campaigns

    GoIssue enables targeted phishing on GitHub users, risking data theft and developer breache

Toutes les nouvelles