I. Introduction The United States is in an era where technology is advancing at a quicker pace than the education of society and its users can understand. This is a problem because the economic woes and critical infrastructures are included in every aspect of this fast paced evolution of technology. Threat topics will be discussed using multiple sources from the Internet and online library. An additional main source will be pulled directly from reports from the Director of National Intelligence, James R. Clapper. Discussions will Start with what a threat is and how a threat is assigned into categories; then moving to a discussion about the global threat landscape and which areas are critical to the United States shall be talked about along with what is necessary for the United States to keep up with the rapid pace of growth. At the top of the U.S. intelligence community’s 2013 assessment of global threats is cyber, followed by terrorism and transnational organized crime, weapons of mass destruction proliferation, counterintelligence and space activities, insecurity and competition for natural resources, health and pandemic threats, and mass atrocities ("Defense.gov News Article: Cyber Tops Intel Community’s 2013 Global Threat Assessment", n.d., p. xx-xx). Another topic that shall be discussed is critical infrastructure requirements and how cyber security is an important aspect in the planning and maintenance. Further discussion will identify what state and non-state actors are and which state and non-state actors threaten the United States. With this information, a conclusion on how these global threats affect how the policy makers try to defend the United States from these types of global threats. II. Whic... ... middle of paper ... ...forcement, and Federal Protective Service. Policy makers are responsible for performing a never ending task of adapting to the global threats and how they pertain to critical infrastructure in the United States. Works Cited 2013 Global Threat Intelligence | Solutionary Press Release. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.solutionary.com/news-events/press-releases/2013/03/2013-global-threat-intelligence/ Defense.gov News Article: Cyber Tops Intel Community?s 2013 Global Threat Assessment. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=119776 Top 7 developments in the global threat landscape - CXOtoday.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cxotoday.com/story/top-7-developments-in-the-global-threat-landscape/ USA Patriot Act of 2001. (2001, Oct. 26). Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ56/pdf/PLAW-107publ56.pdf
At this juncture, it may be somewhat difficult to accept the proposition that a threat to the telecommunications grid, both wired and wireless, in the United States could potentially be subject to a catastrophic cyber attack. After careful research on the subject, it appears the potentiality of an event of such magnitude, which either disrupts one or the other grids for a long period or destroys either, is both theoretically and realistically impossible. It may be that proponents—those who advance such theories—equate such “doomsday” scenarios as if a cyber attack would or could be of the same magnitude as a conventional or nuclear military strike. Terms such as “cyber Pearl Harbor,” “cyber 9/11” and “cyber Vietnam” have been used to describes potential catastrophic cyber attacks and yet, “Though many have posited notions on what a ‘real’ cyber war would be like, we lack the understanding of how such conflicts will be conducted and evolve.” (Rattray & Healey, 2010, p. 77). Yet, the U.S. government continues to focus on such events, as if the plausibility of small-scale cyber attacks were not as pressing.
The integrated threat theory model consists of four types of threats that can lead to prejudice. These threats are: realistic threats, symbolic threats, intergroup anxiety, and negative stereotypes. Realistic threats are posed by the outgroup and have several types of consequence and impact. They can either be threats of war, threats to political and/or economic power of the ingroup, and threats to physical and/or material well-being of the ingroup and its members. Symbolic threats is usually based on perceived group differences in morals, values, standards, beliefs, and attitudes. Symbolic threats are also threats to the ingroup’s worldview and these threats arise because the ingroup believes that its system of values are morally correct.
Various agencies seek Bruce Berkowitz’s input on information technology on warfare due to his experience. He holds an academic research position at the Hoover Institute at Stanford University and is a senior analyst at the RAND Corporation, a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. He began his career at the Central Intelligence Agency and served as a staff member for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Since leaving government, Berkowitz has combined careers as a widely published author and a consultant to the Defense Department and other government agencies in an effort to deliver the message of the importance of information technology.
Terrorism represents a continuing threat to the United States. It is the most significant threat to our national security. Terrorist attacks have definitely left many concerns about the possibilities of future incidents of terrorism in the United States. Since the events of September 11, 2011, Americans and much of the world are afraid. Americans are at war with terrorism and no longer feel comfortable. A part of this unease feeling has to do with cyber terrorism.
The United States has endured numerous security breaches and high security threats over the past two decades. After the attacks on 9/11, the office of Intelligence became a vital source in retrieving sensitive data and tracking down potential terrorists and their networks which could pose a threat to the American people and then forwarding that vital information to the Department of Homeland Security and other government agencies. Intelligence became a key role in “assessing threats to critical American infrastructures, bio-and nuclear terrorism, pandemic diseases, threats to the borders to the nation, and radicalization within American society” (Randol, 2009, p. 7). The sharing of homeland security intelligence has become a precedence for Congress and the government. Our nation must be one step ahead of any potential terrorists that want to harm our turf. Within this text the capabilities and limitations of both domestic and foreign intelligence in supporting homeland security efforts will be explained;
Provides a review of homeland security in 2008 from the members of the Naval postgraduate schools homeland security network. A survey was administered among the network in regards to what they considered the most important homeland security issue of the year and what issues they believe will be of most importance in the near future.
I will conduct a Homeland Security Assessment for my organization because the need for homeland security is tied to the underlying vulnerability of my company’s infrastructure in general, but I would conduct one for any threats against the infrastructure of my company. In our company we would need to establish a planning team to conduct Homeland Security Assessment for my organization by developing a plan Also, Analyzing capabilities and hazards in company to minimizing the threat.The next step is to Implementing the plan. Another, step in conducting Homeland Security Assessment is getting prepared.The company game plan for homeland security set homeland security task into six critical mission areas: (1) comprehension and caution(2) boundary and transport security, (3) Military personal design to prevent any kind of terrorism, (4) protecting the company critical organizational structure (5) guarding against disastrous terrorism in the company like people getting shot up, and (6) the company's organizational structure crisis preparedness and response. The first three critical mission areas focus on stopping a terrorist attack. The next two on reducing protectiveness, and the final one is reduced to a small amount of damage and recovery from
The threats to security from the United States Department of Defense, the national power grid and the Chamber of Commerce are very real and omnipresent. The Defense Department made an admission of the first major cyber attack upon its systems in August 2010. It was revealed that the attack actually took place in 2008 and was accomplished by placing a malicious code into the flash drive of a U.S. military laptop. “The code spread undetected on both classified and unclassified systems, establishing what amounted to a digital breachhead.” (2) This quote, attributed to then Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn III, is just part of the shocking revelations that were disclosed in his speech made on July 14, 2011.
The United States of America is one of the most powerful countries in the world. This power is a direct result of the careful planning of policies that will govern the direction that the country goes. An effective defense policy is very important in assuring the safety of the citizens in the country and assuring a commanding position within the international community. In accordance, it is important that the United States should adopt a defense policy, so that they seek to form a coalition of strong allies in which they are the sole superpower so that in essence, they may control the whole international community. Before being able to actively pursue this defense policy and act powerful, we must make ourselves powerful. In the process of making ourselves powerful, we must carefully examine the existing threats to the country and this power that we want to have.
Evaluating threats to America’s national security is a challenge that is undertaken by academics, intelligence analysts, policy-makers, and anyone else with the patience. During the Cold War, America’s biggest concern was easy to define, the only other state capable of competing with America, the Soviet Union. Today, America faces threats from states, non-state actors, domestic groups, and even economic conditions. However, two states should always be kept in mind when discussing national security, China and Russia, with China being the biggest threat.
However, some sources say that the DHS lead National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) falls well short because of not listening and not sharing information with critical infrastructure owner/operators. The NIPP document created by the DHS is for the government and is not a plan to improve resilience. The document is said to lack private sector information and most feel that the meetings with the government about the document were not heard. As for the information sharing part of the document there are shortcomings that do not enhance national level situational awareness. However, there are seven topics raised in the new document after its original creation four years ago. The first is to elevate security and resilience as the primary aim of CIP efforts. Second, expanding and updating critical infrastructure risk management. Third, focus on national priorities jointly determined by public and private sector. Fourth, integrate cyber and physical security. Fifth, affirm the reality that critical infrastructure security and resilience require international collaboration. Sixth, show continued progress to support execution of the plan at both national and community levels. Lastly, present a detailed Call to Action that includes steps the federal government will undertake to work with partners to make progress toward security and
...the nation’s critical infrastructure. With the creation of the DHS the government has shown that they are investing money and resources into protecting our nation’s infrastructure.
National security in the United States is extremely important and requires extensive risk management measures including strategic, exercise, operational and capability-based planning, research, development, and making resource decisions in order to address real-world events, maintain safety, security and resilience (Department of Homeland Security [DHS], 2011). The national security and threat assessment process consists of identifying the risk and establishing an objective, analyzing the relative risks and environment, exploring alternatives and devising a plan of action for risk management, decision making and continued monitoring and surveillance (DHS, 2011). Identifying risks entails establishing a context to define the risk, considering related risks and varying scenarios, including the unlikely ones, which then leads to the analysis phase; gathering data and utilizing various methodologies and analysis data software systems to survey incidence rates, relative risks, prevalence rates, likelihood and probable outcomes (DHS, 2011). These two key phases lay the foundation to explore alternatives and devise action plans. Threats, vulnerabilities and consequences (TCV) are also a key component of many national security risk management assessments because it directly relates to safety and operation capabilities, but the text stress that it should not be included in the framework of every assessment because it is not always applicable (DHS, 2011).
In recent years, many possible plans to enact government regulation to improve cybersecurity have been suggested. Most recently, in 2017, then U.S. president Barack Obama implemented the Cybersecurity National Action Plan (CNAP). The plan would have invested $19 billion in cybersecurity by gathering experts to make recommendations in regards to cyber security, help secure the government IT group, and encourage more advanced security measures (Daniel 1). However, while CNAP does present a way to solve the problem, it just adds another program that attempts to enhance cybersecurity: “It is the multiplicity of programs and division of responsibility that diminishes their effectiveness. At least eleven federal agencies bear significant responsibility for cybersecurity” (Cohen 1). Every so often, another cybersecurity program will be established, but former plans are seldom removed. This leads to a large amount of departments to share responsibility, which creates general confusion and limits each department’s power. Furthermore, widespread government regulation may weaken cybersecurity. Many fear that any regulation would not be flexible enough and would instead allow easier hacking (Ridge 3). If every system in the entire nation had the same security measures, it would be much easier to break into as by breaking into one system, a hacker a could break into everything.
The nation has become dependent on technology, furthermore, cyberspace. It’s encompassed in everything we deliver in our daily lives, our phones, internet, communication, purchases, entertainment, flying airplane, launching missiles, operating nuclear plants, and implicitly, our protection. The more ever-growing technology empower Americans, the more they become prey to cyber threats. The United States Executive Office of the President stated, “The President identified cybersecurity as one of the top priorities of his administration in doing so, directed a 60-day review to assess polices.” (United States Executive Office of the President, 2009, p.2). Furthermore, critical infrastructure, our network, and internet alike are identified as national assets upon which the administration will orchestrate integrated cybersecurity policies without infringing upon and protecting privacy. While protecting our infrastructure, personal privacy, and civil liberties, we have to keep in mind the private sector owns and operates the majority of our critical and digital infrastructure.