Yesterday, after two long days of debate including the
consideration of over 100 amendments the House passed H4310, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, by a bipartisan vote of 299 to
120. The cyber provisions of the bill that I described in an earlier
blog remain in the bill (one with a floor revision). Three cyber-related
amendments to the bill were considered during the floor debate; all passed by
voice vote.
There is still nothing specifically addressing industrial
cybersecurity or control system security, but it does offer a look at the
expansion of congressional interest in cyber operations. The interesting thing
about the votes on these three cyber-related amendments is that they were
considered as part of three separate ‘en bloc’ votes containing 15 or more
other amendments. Such groupings are made up of non-controversial amendments
because significant opposition to even one of the members of the group could
result in all of the amendments being voted down.
Amending Offensive Operations in Cyberspace
In the earlier blog I noted that the bill considered this
week amended the current congressional authority to conduct operations in
cyberspace to specifically authorize clandestine operations in support of
congressionally cleared operations. Rep. Rogers (R,MI) offered an
amendment that would clarify that while clandestine operations would be
authorized nothing “in this section shall be construed to authorize a covert
action” {§954(d)}. While there may be more sophisticated explanations for the
difference between ‘clandestine’ and ‘covert’ here it appears to rest upon the
type of Congressional authorization required for the action.
Air Force and Cyber Security
Rep. Hanna (R,NY) offered
an amendment that would require the Secretary to report on Air Force cyber
operations research, science, and technology. Most of this is amendment is
focused on military operations in cyberspace, but the last sub-paragraph
requires the inclusion of a review of the “potential benefit to the Air Force
for collaboration with private industry and the development of cyber security
technology clusters” {§245(9)}. While not specific to control system security,
any additional research into cybersecurity will probably be beneficial to the
ICS processes.
Interagency Coordination
The final cyber-related amendment was offered by Rep.
Thornberry (R,TX) that would require the establishment of an interagency
organization that would “coordinate and deconflict full-spectrum military cyber
operations for the Federal Government” {§1084(a)}. While this is probably
directed at DOD agencies (it does refer to military ‘cyber operations’ after
all), this could be expanded to include non-DOD agencies like DHS. Coordination
of government cyber operations (coordination of anything, for that matter) is
probably a good thing in general.
Moving Forward
Now that it has passed in the House we can expect that the
Senate will start with its own version of the bill (which I haven’t seen yet)
and then the two will get reconciled in conference. It’s anybody’s guess as to
what will survive that process.
No comments:
Post a Comment