The infrastructure protection approach is only the result of a new agreement signed between Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and Defense Secretary James Mattis. This is the latest of several agreements over the past decade that are specific to cyber-cooperation, but officials said that the latest version this week, at a hearing in the House of Representatives, boils down to a „change of the sea“ in the relationship between DoD and DHS. Jeaneatte Manfra, assistant secretary for cybersecurity and communications security, said the agreement respects DHS` established role in defending U.S.-based networks, while attacking DoD`s concerns that the networks it depends on are not always under its control or authority. One of the expected benefits of the agreement is improved DHS` access to DoD, especially the NSA, resources and know-how, especially the Cryptologic Services Group. It is interesting to note that the agreement comes shortly after a report by an inspector general that criticizes the vulnerability to cyberattacks against DHS systems. Whether the sharing of resources will contribute to the treatment of its systems is unclear, given that the agreement appears to be aimed at strengthening synchronization with respect to certain operations rather than exacerbating general weaknesses. And officials said there was already evidence. DoD and DHS are working on several so-called „Pathfinder“ projects and discover how resources, expertise and intelligence can be used together. The first major example was on the eve of the mid-session elections in 2018. Rapuano said the intention was to ensure that departments actually progress in day-to-day operations, not just superficial cooperation agreements. In the meantime, while subject to legitimate criticism, the agreement allows DHS to access the most advanced U.S. cybersecurity resources to protect national computer networks, the most likely cyber target.
While we need to keep a close eye on privacy and the prevention of bureaucratic struggles, this potentially important advance for American cybersecurity should not be overlooked. On the other hand, if the lines of jurisdiction are not already clear or if, as Beckstrom`s letter indicates, the OVERstaying of the NSA is responsible for inter-institutional litigation, the agreement can be used to exacerbate these difficulties.
