[ISN] Companies Form Computer Security Lobby

From: InfoSec News (isn@private)
Date: Wed Feb 25 2004 - 02:11:43 PST

  • Next message: InfoSec News: "Re: [ISN] Businesses are under attack, says MS security head (Three messages)"

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3455-2004Feb24.html
    
    By Brian Krebs
    washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
    February 25, 2004
    
    Eleven of the nation's top computer security companies are forming a
    new organization to lobby on cyber-security issues in Washington,
    breaking ranks with the broader technology industry in hopes that a
    more cooperative approach to protecting the nation's critical
    information infrastructure will avert heavy-handed regulation by
    Congress and the White House.
    
    Leaders of the Cyber Security Industry Alliance (CSIA) stress that
    they remain wary of any government effort to regulate security
    practices. They are, however, willing to concede that some
    requirements, perhaps developed under existing federal laws, could
    improve computer security practices without foisting onerous mandates
    on businesses.
    
    That concession marks a departure from the technology industry's
    traditional anti-regulatory philosophy and signals an attempt by the
    computer security community to speed up efforts to implement a White
    House-sponsored plan to secure the nation's electronic communications
    networks.
    
    "Rather than saying to Congress, 'This is not an issue, stay out,' we
    as an industry need to figure out how to solve these problems in a
    proactive way before someone gets fed up and says it's time to
    legislate," said Sanjay Kumar, the chief executive of Islandia,
    N.Y.-based Computer Associates and a leading figure in the new
    organization.
    
    One of the first tasks on the alliance's agenda is to develop common
    standards for reporting and sharing information on the latest Internet
    security threats. A presidential commission report submitted to the
    White House earlier this month found that the anti-virus software
    vendors often create public confusion by giving different names and
    threat levels to the same computer viruses and worms.
    
    Richard Clarke, the former White House adviser who led the drafting of
    the White House's National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace, said the
    spate of worms and viruses that plagued the Internet in 2003 put added
    pressure on the security industry to take action.
    
    "Last year was the worst in history in terms of the damage from
    cyber-attacks," Clarke said. "I think we're getting to the point where
    Congress wants something to happen, the people and American
    corporations that buy information technology want something to happen,
    and so having the technology security industry organized to be part of
    that debate makes a lot of sense."
    
    "This is a maturing industry, and the computer security community
    needs to speak with a common voice," said Paul Kurtz, who took the top
    job at the alliance after resigning earlier this month as special
    assistant to President Bush on critical infrastructure protection.
    
    Harris Miller, president of the 400-member Information Technology
    Association of America (ITAA), acknowledged that the private sector's
    progress in implementing the national cyber-security plan "has been
    slower that everyone would like, but the regulations and legislation
    we've heard about would all be counterproductive."
    
    Miller declined to discuss the new alliance, saying only that the ITAA
    would continue to resist calls for any additional computer security
    regulation.
    
    "Regulation means standards, and standards mean stopping innovation,"  
    Miller said. "Because of that, we think more computer security
    regulations would actually make the country more vulnerable to
    cyber-attacks than it is today."
    
    This conflict was highlighted last year when Rep. Adam Putnam (R-Fla.)  
    suggested that publicly traded companies should certify with the
    Securities and Exchange Commission that they meet certain
    cyber-security standards.
    
    Putnam shelved the proposal after the ITAA, the Business Software
    Alliance (BSA) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce protested.
    
    The three associations assembled a series of working groups --
    including some members of the new security alliance -- to come up with
    their own ideas for cyber-security best practices, such as raising
    awareness of computer security threats, improving response time after
    attacks, changes in corporate governance to make security a priority
    and improving software development. Their report is due in early
    March.
    
    The security alliance, meanwhile, said it will seek clarification from
    Congress on how several recently enacted laws would apply to corporate
    network security.
    
    "There's a misperception that the wired world is dramatically
    different than the physical world we live in, but many of the rules
    that control interstate commerce already apply in the wired world,"  
    said John Thompson, chairman and chief executive of Cupertino,
    Calif.-based anti-virus company Symantec Corp. "Why wouldn't we make
    sure that current laws are being appropriately enforced? We need to
    become more cognizant of the current laws we have and how they apply
    in the wired world."
    
    The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and
    the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act require publicly traded companies to assure
    the privacy and integrity of consumer health and financial data but
    few companies can say how they should comply with these regulations
    from a network security perspective.
    
    "Where's the acid test to say whether companies are aligned with these
    laws? The answer is it doesn't exist," said Tom Noonan, president and
    chief executive of Atlanta-based Internet Security Systems.
    
    The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, enacted nearly two years ago in response to a
    wave of corporate accounting scandals, requires executives at the
    nation's public companies to stake their reputations on the integrity
    of their financial books. It also requires executives to take
    responsibility for "internal controls" to ensure the accuracy of
    financial reporting -- a requirement that some say means chief
    executives must attest to the security of their corporate networks as
    well. That section of the law goes into effect next year, and alliance
    members say companies do not yet know how to comply with it.
    
    "How can you certify that your internal controls are adequate if you
    don't know if your corporate security posture is good," said George
    Samenuk, chairman and chief executive of Network Associates in Santa
    Clara, Calif. "People are confused about what levers they have to pull
    and what the penalties are for falling behind, and in the absence of
    greater clarity a lot of these regulations are just creating
    confusion."
    
    Bill Connor, chief executive at Entrust of Addison, Texas, said the
    alliance believes that this problem will lessen once corporate
    executives understand the value of investing more time and money in
    solid security policies. Failing to do that, he said, can cost more in
    the long run if Internet attacks cripple their businesses or expose
    them to customer and shareholder lawsuits.
    
    "Cybersecurity is not a technical issue but really a boardroom and
    executive issue," said Connor, who co-chairs a working group pushing
    for a set of standards for companies to tell whether their policies
    comply with existing laws. "In the end, it may take legislation to get
    companies to do the right thing, but until you have a framework that
    translates how these risks apply to company's bottom line, new
    regulation may only increase confusion in the market."
    
    John Pescatore, vice president for Internet security at Stamford
    Conn.-based market research firm Gartner Inc., said that the
    alliance's unstated goal is its members' bottom lines.
    
    "The biggest issue facing the computer security industry is there's
    nothing that forces the government to buy a lot more than the stuff
    that they have now," Pescatore said. "What they're looking for are
    government standards that say 'you must meet this standard to be
    secure.'"
    
    Thompson disputed that notion. "We know how to make money in this
    business, and I think for someone to suggest that indicates their lack
    of understanding of the challenges that face the nation on
    cyber-security."
    
    But Network Associates's Samenuk was more pragmatic.
    
    "When you talk about large government customers, if we do the right
    job of education and awareness, then business will flow," Samenuk
    said. "We have a duty to help people make the right decisions on
    security, but we're not doing this entirely out of the kindness of our
    hearts."
    
    The other companies in the Cyber Security Industry Alliance include
    Houston-based Bindview Corp., Redwood City, Calif.-based Check Point
    Software Technologies, Juniper Networks subsidiary Netscreen
    Technologies of Sunnyvale, Calif., Palo Alto, Calif.-based PGP Corp.,
    RSA Security of Bedford, Mass. and San Jose, Calif.-based Secure
    Computing Corp.
    
    
    
    -
    ISN is currently hosted by Attrition.org
    
    To unsubscribe email majordomo@private with 'unsubscribe isn'
    in the BODY of the mail.
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Feb 25 2004 - 05:23:08 PST