When the White House released the National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace in February last year, the guiding principle was to make it a "living document" capable of changing with the times and meeting the needs of a diverse Internet community. But in the year since its release, the strategy has had little or no impact on the security plans and investments of many of the companies that were supposed to be integral to its implementation, corporate IT executives say. And although some critical-infrastructure sectors have heeded the government's call to action, many corporate users still view the plan as irrelevant to the challenges they face. . . .. When the White House released the National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace in February last year, the guiding principle was to make it a "living document" capable of changing with the times and meeting the needs of a diverse Internet community. But in the year since its release, the strategy has had little or no impact on the security plans and investments of many of the companies that were supposed to be integral to its implementation, corporate IT executives say. And although some critical-infrastructure sectors have heeded the government's call to action, many corporate users still view the plan as irrelevant to the challenges they face. "Although we all do our best in thinking strategically about issues like [the national strategy], they are at the bottom of any list I have," said John Spencer Jr., vice president of operations and CIO at the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists in Bethesda, Md. "What's the payoff? "I have existing budgets that change by the day, I'm trying to patch the holes in my Microsoft-based infrastructure daily and weekly, [and] new and different variants of viruses are running rampant," Spencer said. "I could give you a list of 100 things like this that I'm addressing by the minute, day and week. I can see cause and effect related to these issues, but not so with this strategy." Begging vs. Regulating For IT managers like Spencer,"cause and effect" translates into detailed justification for increasing resources to do what the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's National Cyber Security Division (NCSD) is asking of companies across the country: to belly up and take the lead in securing cyberspace. The threatened alternative: unwanted regulation. The irony is that in the private sector, the onset of new regulations -- regulations that have nothing to do with the DHS -- has in fact forced improvements in cybersecurity, users and analysts say. For example, Davidson Healthcare in Lexington, N.C., along with every other company in the health care industry, faces on April 15 the non-negotiable activation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which requires enhanced security to protect private patient data. Unlike HIPAA, however, the release of the national strategy "hasn't necessarily provided any [justification] for additional funding," said Kevin Buchanan, director of IT at Davidson Healthcare. "HIPAA is not a recommendation; it's federal law. And when I say something is a federal requirement, senior managers can't argue with that." The link for this article located at ComputerWorld.com is no longer available. . The federal guidelines for enhancing digital safety have had little effect on private sector cybersecurity expenditures since their publication.. Corporate IT Strategy,Cybersecurity Investment,National Cyber Strategy,Cybersecurity Regulations. . Anthony Pell
President George W. Bush on Monday proposed a $2.4 trillion federal budget that boosts spending on information technology and on computer crime investigation. The record budget request for the 2005 fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1, 2004, asks Congress to ignore a widening deficit of $521 billion and to increase defense spending by 7 percent and homeland security spending by 10 percent. . . .. President George W. Bush on Monday proposed a $2.4 trillion federal budget that boosts spending on information technology and on computer crime investigation. The record budget request for the 2005 fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1, 2004, asks Congress to ignore a widening deficit of $521 billion and to increase defense spending by 7 percent and homeland security spending by 10 percent. In a letter to Congress accompanying the proposed budget, Bush acknowledged the record gap between spending and tax revenue. "Economic growth and good stewardship of taxpayer dollars will help us meet another important priority: cutting the budget deficit brought on by recession and war," Bush said. "We must continue to evaluate each federal program, to make sure that it meets its goals, and produces the desired results." The link for this article located at ZDNet is no longer available. . President Barack Obama unveiled a $3 trillion budget plan focusing on renewable energy initiatives and social safety net enhancements.. Cybercrime Spending, Technology Investment, Defense Budget, Homeland Security, Federal Budget Proposal. . Anthony Pell
There's one way to prove that security is a necessary IT expense: hire hackers to successfully break into your own network. CFOs are treating security as a cost item to be controlled--and in some cases, even eliminated. That's the buzz at . . . . There's one way to prove that security is a necessary IT expense: hire hackers to successfully break into your own network. CFOs are treating security as a cost item to be controlled--and in some cases, even eliminated. That's the buzz at the recent CeBit trade show. Despite IT managers wanting to spend more on security, CFOs are putting the brakes on such spending. The latest thinking, apparently, is that the terrorist activity was more than a quarter ago, so it's history. In other words, CFOs are seeing all those security costs on the balance sheet--yet they're not seeing any security problems. (The fact that increased security is heading off problems is lost on them.) This doesn't surprise me. I've been hearing similar sentiments from people in the US. Outside the IT community, it seems that security is either a business impediment or an unnecessary cost. As a result, CIOs and network managers are under constant pressure to do less, as a way to save money and reduce inconvenience. The link for this article located at ZDNet AU is no longer available. . There's one way to prove that security is a necessary IT expense: hire hackers to successfully break. there's, prove, security, necessary, expense, hackers, successfully, break. . LinuxSecurity.com Team
Get the latest Linux and open source security news straight to your inbox.