Executive order could be used to issue Cybersecurity Bill

Computers are becoming a part of everything. Your car, your entertainment, your government, and your country's infrastructure. Defending the infrastructure of a country when it runs on a computer is stressful. People are going to be trying to hit it so they can score some internet cool points to brag about.

Obama could be weighing up an executive order on how best to maintain his country's cybersecurity. The White House has not ruled out an executive decision on the matter if Congress cannot decide for itself. The official explanation for a cybersecurity bill is to "strengthen the nation's defenses". While that's a very understandable goal, the approach taken has seen some opposition from the public and from the Republican party.

Recently, Obama has warned a successful cyber-attack on a bank, water system, electrical grid, or hospital could have devastating consequences. This, of course, would be a problem if it happened. If it did then there are lives at stake and millions of dollars, if not billions.

Republicans argued that the bill would burden businesses with regulations ineffective regulations that simply appear effective. The Republican opposition led to the bill being altered. It was watered-down; made less controlling, and more Republican friendly. They weren't sold on it. The bill was still rejected in Congress. An executive order from the top could simply sidestep Congress. You disagree, Republicans? Tough luck.

When Obama pushes something past Congress it is something he considers too urgent to let wait. Congress can be slower to decide on a bill, and if he feels it is urgent it can be rushed past them. Senior Fellow of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Jim Lewis, has stated that Obama could allow many of the core tenets of the Cybersecurity Act through without any real opposition.

Companies managing major computer systems are already heavily regulated. Lewis opposes the idea of an executive order. An order could mean agencies regulating everything to ensure it's all in tip-top shape. He contests that, saying that you don't need a new authority to maintain things when these companies and organizations already are doing it well enough. If Obama uses an executive order to enter any legislation, he is open to ire from Republicans.

They have opposed the Cybersecurity Act for some time now, and Obama simply pushing it through could be enough to cause some significant backlash. That wouldn't be good, since what Obama does here is going to be in the public's memory. Elections campaigns are ongoing, and therefore what Obama does here could be a deciding factor. Whether he passes an executive order or not remains to be seen. What he will gain or lose from it is also very difficult to truly measure, though it would certainly be interesting to discover.

Source: The Hill

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Trivia: Printing all the way to Mars and back

Next Story

Sprint's 4G-LTE connection appears in Silicon Valley

22 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

This article needs to be rewritten in it's entirety. Even unprofessional journalism should be objective. The POTUS hiding behind his role to dictate to us how we will run our networks is not a good thing. Not to mention it flies in the face of checks and balances for him to sidestep the legislative branch. This is not the time or place for him to do this if he wants to win another election.

This looks like an excerpt from a longer article. The beginning doesn't start at the beginning and the end does have a conclusion. What's the point?

The whole fake left-right theater should be ignored, I can't think of a single politician at this level that isn't completely compromised. This is nothing short of yet another completely unnecessary government power grab. The ultimate goal is to have complete say over who and what is "permitted" to use the internet as "they" see fit. The useful idiots that claim political high ground and actually argue for these laws anger me as much as the criminals that design these schemes.

Hahaiah said,
The whole fake left-right theater should be ignored, I can't think of a single politician at this level that isn't completely compromised. This is nothing short of yet another completely unnecessary government power grab. The ultimate goal is to have complete say over who and what is "permitted" to use the internet as "they" see fit. The useful idiots that claim political high ground and actually argue for these laws anger me as much as the criminals that design these schemes.

Well, that's the problem - there's no left-right theater, only an extreme right-right one.

Aethec said,

Well, that's the problem - there's no left-right theater, only an extreme right-right one.

So you are saying that Harry Reid is extreme right? How completely niave...

Hackersoft MS MVP said,

So you are saying that Harry Reid is extreme right? How completely niave...
Maybe so, maybe not. I gave up on politics a long time ago. It's pointless for me to pay attention, get ****ed, and not be able to do anything about it. Welcome to America, right?

Of course I honestly can't blame the politicians for any of this. They are what they are. Dog s**t by any other name would still smell like dog s**t. It's the peoples fault for worrying about Justin Biebers' next text or who's going to win American Idol rather than give a damn about their own government. Oh, it's good for the children you say? You can't sign that freedom stripping bill any faster?

Harry Reid is just as much of a politician as every other out there. All politicians are extremists. Left and right doesn't mean crap. It's like trying to say dog crap and dog s**t are two different things.

I find it odd how little people understand Executive Orders. This would be less than ineffective.

And the Republicans have a good point about the inefectiveness of government regulations... I've not read this bill, but I would bet money that it wouldn't actually accomplish anything.

M_Lyons10 said,
And the Republicans have a good point about the inefectiveness of government regulations... I've not read this bill, but I would bet money that it wouldn't actually accomplish anything.

So how about you actually read the bill instead of complaining about something you don't know?
That's just as stupid as all the Windows 8 haters who never used it but are sure they'll hate it.

Aethec said,

So how about you actually read the bill instead of complaining about something you don't know?
That's just as stupid as all the Windows 8 haters who never used it but are sure they'll hate it.

uhhm no thats plain stupid !

You don't need to use windows 8 to see it sucks.
The difference is there is pictures, videos, reviews and feedback galore.
What is more scrutinized right now than windows ?
If windows 8 was some secret project and only a handful of people seen it
that would be one thing but that is not the case and it seems to me you are
another cheerleader taking this opportunity to tarnish the negative views of some intelligent people. Sorry but you are the one with the problem..

Aethec said,

So how about you actually read the bill instead of complaining about something you don't know?
That's just as stupid as all the Windows 8 haters who never used it but are sure they'll hate it.

As I see it, government intervention is usually clumsy and any technological requirements would probably become quickly outdated. Government is best at using force and keeping order and making broad restrictions - little details are not its strong point.

More change without hope... Obama will strip you of as much liberty as possible in the name of some pie in the sky policy... easily the most marxist president ever

rhianntp said,
More change without hope... Obama will strip you of as much liberty as possible in the name of some pie in the sky policy... easily the most marxist president ever

Obama is a marxist? Do you even know what marxist means, and what Obama does?

Aethec said,

Obama is a marxist? Do you even know what marxist means, and what Obama does?
Please define a Marxist. Its pretty obvious marxist thinking drives much of Obama's worldview.

The cybersecurity act is worthless. All it will do is create more bogus jobs for people who'll feel they have something important to do, actual companies will be forced to comply with what ever bogus technolgoies and procedures that these new 'agencies' impose.

So after all that, what is actually left and how is it helping?
Not much really, companies will still mostly just comply with what ever they need, and because its a government agency program they'll mostly assume thats all they need to do to protect there business and customers.
Education of the need to employ a dedicated security expert is what is needed. If your company has computers and even more so if they're networked (Internal LAN and Internet) then you REALLY need to get a security consultant in. Dedicated staff who are accountable for security issues or at least 3rd party audits on the network and systems in place.

Lastly, but sometimes the most important and most looked over, general Staff training on security. The amount of times I've seen workstations left logged in or smartcards left in the readers or even people shouting across rooms for others to sign in with their username and passwords... these have been management people who should know better.

When your company comes under attack from a hacker who wants to get in, who wants to do damage, they will find away. Its the security of the after affects that matters most and unfortunatly, it seems a lot of high profile companies are still getting it wrong. ie, not even salting their passwords!

Good old argument, one party throwing up all its might to show what is needed to get things secured, where as another group fear full of their freedom of security tries to point out the flaws of this system which will misuse the power coming from the rule

Choto Cheeta said,
Good old argument, one party throwing up all its might to show what is needed to get things secured, where as another group fear full of their freedom of security tries to point out the flaws of this system which will misuse the power coming from the rule
It's cute that you think a bill out of congress or an executive order out of the white house "is needed to get things secured." I'm sure most of them believe all of the tech scenes from 24. Let the industry create standards to be followed that are doable.

I don't usually make comments like this, but this article is very poorly written. It doesn't even make an attempt at objectivity and doesn't seem to have any real point.

x9_ said,
I don't usually make comments like this, but this article is very poorly written. It doesn't even make an attempt at objectivity and doesn't seem to have any real point.

Agreed. Not only this is badly written, it also fails at communicating whatever the author wanted to communicate. Obama did the right thing? Republicans are protecting our interests? That regulation would be effective? Ineffective?
(also, I still can't figure out what the last, seemingly unfinished, sentence means - the elections *are* coming up)

x9_ said,
I don't usually make comments like this, but this article is very poorly written. It doesn't even make an attempt at objectivity and doesn't seem to have any real point.

I second this motion. The author's opinion is presented as fact without any evidence or corroboration. This article does not represent a news story, it is simply a narrative from one person and would be more appropriate to be on the forums than presented as "news".

jamieakers said,
I second this motion. The author's opinion is presented as fact without any evidence or corroboration. This article does not represent a news story, it is simply a narrative from one person and would be more appropriate to be on the forums than presented as "news".

Or an editorial, if it was written correctly.

I think the main problem here that makes the article look weird is the complete lack of any words that tie sentences together. It just looks like a bunch of semi-related sentences randomly thrown together to form paragraphs. Linking words have a purpose!