Aaron Boyd, Author at Marine Corps Times

Trump administration promises more aggressive, less political cyber stance

Aaron Boyd — Wed, 09 Nov 2016 19:33:47 +0000

In an election that rarely dipped into policy specifics, cybersecurity was front and center as both a political weapon and a major platform for both parties.

With several significant hacks — likely perpetrated by Russian-sponsored actors — against the Democratic party and candidates, there was no question that cyber would emerge as a core issue.

For his part, President-elect Donald Trump was unambiguous about his stance on cybersecurity.

“As a deterrent against attacks on our critical resources, the United States must possess — and has to — the unquestioned capacity to launch crippling cyber counterattacks. And I mean crippling,” Trump told a veterans group on Oct. 3. “America’s dominance in the arena must be unquestioned. Today, it’s totally questioned. People don’t even know if we have the capability that we are supposed to have.”

Along with a more aggressive offensive stance in cyberspace, Trump also called for a cyber review team — made up of military and civilian government experts, as well as from the private sector — to conduct a holistic assessment of the federal government’s cybersecurity posture, presumably with an eye toward bolstering that posture.

Trump “is specifically committed to fixing our cyber capabilities or improving them,” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., a leading candidate for secretary of defense, said in an interview with Defense News, a sister publication of Federal Times. “We have got to both have a defensive plan and an offensive plan. You simply can’t allow yourself to be vulnerable all of the time to cyberattacks and not have a response.”

While Trump has pledged to be more aggressive in cyberspace, the realities of building strong defensive and offensive capabilities will be a long haul, according to Greg Garcia, executive vice president at Signal Group and the first Department of Homeland Security assistant secretary for cybersecurity. Moreover, a more aggressive America will lead to more aggressive adversaries, he said.

“The Donald talks tough … but the reality is that cybersecurity policy movement is by its nature incremental,” Garcia said. “Its technological complexity coupled with a wide and disparate network of users, vendors and service providers means that the law of unintended consequences is guaranteed to come into play against any combination of those players with promulgation of aggressive policy or regulatory initiatives.”

“Reacting and calling for security best practices are easy to do,” former National Security Agency computer scientist Ben Johnson, now chief security strategist at Carbon Black, said. “It gets to be a lot harder when we’re talking about doing these things in practice, though.”

The specifics will be the hardest to pin down, according to Johnson.

“[Is] Donald suggesting that we, as a country, make it a policy to hack back? Should individual businesses have the right to retaliate? Who should be conducting attribution? Should we even focus on attribution?” he wondered. “Attribution and retaliation seem to be on everyone’s minds in Washington right now — from policymakers to military leadership to the media to private experts involved in discussions with the former. These are necessary topics, but let’s not forget how poorly our private companies and our government agencies are doing at defense — we need to improve our capabilities in defending our sensitive data, our infrastructure and our digital credentials.”

Outgoing Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., a potential candidate for secretary of the Navy, said cyber-watchers could expect to see important changes immediately after Trump is sworn in in January, including de-politicization of the nation’s cybersecurity policy.

“I think that with a President Trump, you’ll see him coming out literally within the first few days saying that we are going to have an international defense strategy that is driven by the Pentagon and not by the political National Security Council,” he said. “That’s a clear game-changer. Because if you look around the globe, over the last eight years, the National Security Council has been writing that. And find one country anywhere that we are better off than we were eight years [ago], you cannot find it.”

DOJ Civil Rights Division sending poll monitors to 28 states

Aaron Boyd — Mon, 07 Nov 2016 17:27:50 +0000

While the Justice Department will be sending out fewer election observers in total this election, the Civil Rights Division will be out in force, with more than 500 staffers being deployed to 28 states on Nov. 8.

DOJ personnel will be on hand to ensure minority voters have full access to the polls on Election Day.

“The department will gather information on, among other things, whether voters are subject to different voting qualifications or procedures on the basis of race, color or membership in a language minority group; whether jurisdictions are complying with the minority language provisions of the Voting Rights Act; whether jurisdictions permit voters to receive assistance by a person of his or her choice if the voter is blind, has a disability or is unable to read or write; whether jurisdictions provide polling locations and voting systems allowing voters with disabilities to cast a private and independent ballot; whether jurisdictions comply with the voter registration list requirements of the National Voter Registration Act; and whether jurisdictions comply with the provisional ballot requirements of the Help America Vote Act,” according to a DOJ release.

“The bedrock of our democracy is the right to vote, and the Department of Justice works tirelessly to uphold that right not only on Election Day, but every day,” said Attorney General Loretta Lynch. “As always, our personnel will perform these duties impartially, with one goal in mind: To see to it that every eligible voter can participate in our elections to the full extent that federal law provides.”

To achieve this, the department is sending personnel — including those fluent in Spanish, Asian and Native American languages — to 67 voting districts in 28 states. Those include:

class=”MsoNormal”>Bethel Census Area, Alaska
class=”MsoNormal”>Dillingham Census Area, Alaska
class=”MsoNormal”>Kusilvak Census Area, Alaska
class=”MsoNormal”>Yukon-Koyukuk Census Area, Alaska
class=”MsoNormal”>Maricopa County, Arizona
class=”MsoNormal”>Navajo County, Arizona
class=”MsoNormal”>Alameda County, California
class=”MsoNormal”>Napa County, California
class=”MsoNormal”>Siskiyou County, California
class=”MsoNormal”>East Hartford, Connecticut
class=”MsoNormal”>Farmington, Connecticut
class=”MsoNormal”>Hartford, Connecticut
class=”MsoNormal”>Middletown, Connecticut
class=”MsoNormal”>New Britain, Connecticut
class=”MsoNormal”>Newington, Connecticut
class=”MsoNormal”>West Hartford, Connecticut
class=”MsoNormal”>Hillsborough County, Florida
class=”MsoNormal”>Lee County, Florida
class=”MsoNormal”>Miami-Dade County, Florida
class=”MsoNormal”>Orange County, Florida
class=”MsoNormal”>Palm Beach County, Florida
class=”MsoNormal”>Fulton County, Georgia
class=”MsoNormal”>Gwinnett County, Georgia
class=”MsoNormal”>Hancock County, Georgia
class=”MsoNormal”>Chicago, Illinois
class=”MsoNormal”>Cook County, Illinois
class=”MsoNormal”>Finney County, Kansas
class=”MsoNormal”>Orleans Parish, Louisiana
class=”MsoNormal”>Quincy, Massachusetts
class=”MsoNormal”>Dearborn Heights, Michigan
class=”MsoNormal”>Detroit, Michigan
class=”MsoNormal”>Hamtramck, Michigan
class=”MsoNormal”>St. Louis, Missouri
class=”MsoNormal”>Douglas County, Nebraska
class=”MsoNormal”>Mineral County, Nevada
class=”MsoNormal”>Washoe County, Nevada
class=”MsoNormal”>Middlesex County, New Jersey
class=”MsoNormal”>Cibola County, New Mexico
class=”MsoNormal”>Kings County, New York
class=”MsoNormal”>Orange County, New York
class=”MsoNormal”>Queens County, New York
class=”MsoNormal”>Cumberland County, North Carolina
class=”MsoNormal”>Forsyth County, North Carolina
class=”MsoNormal”>Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
class=”MsoNormal”>Robeson County, North Carolina
class=”MsoNormal”>Wake County, North Carolina
class=”MsoNormal”>Benson County, North Dakota
class=”MsoNormal”>Rolette County, North Dakota
class=”MsoNormal”>Cuyahoga County, Ohio
class=”MsoNormal”>Franklin County, Ohio
class=”MsoNormal”>Hamilton County, Ohio
class=”MsoNormal”>Allegheny County, Pennsylvania
class=”MsoNormal”>Lehigh County, Pennsylvania
class=”MsoNormal”>Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania
class=”MsoNormal”>Pawtucket, Rhode Island
class=”MsoNormal”>Providence, Rhode Island
class=”MsoNormal”>Bennett County, South Dakota
class=”MsoNormal”>Jackson County, South Dakota
class=”MsoNormal”>Oglala Lakota County, South Dakota
class=”MsoNormal”>Shelby County, Tennessee
class=”MsoNormal”>Dallas County, Texas
class=”MsoNormal”>Harris County, Texas
class=”MsoNormal”>Waller County, Texas
class=”MsoNormal”>San Juan County, Utah
class=”MsoNormal”>Fairfax County, Virginia
class=”MsoNormal”>Prince William County, Virginia
class=”MsoNormal”>Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Top 10 contributors to CFC campaigns

Aaron Boyd — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:31:19 +0000

Federal employees across the nation contributed almost $210 million during the 2013 Combined Federal Campaign (CFC) drive with donations through various methods and of varying sizes.

A look at 52 regional CFCs and 72 federal agencies and departments they serve nationwide showed Food and Drug Administration (FDA) employees gave the most on average, donating more than $1,263 per pledge on average.

Top 10 federal agencies by average donation

Agency	Pledges	Total	Average
FDA	33	$41,698.00	$1,263.58
FCC	12	$14,209.00	$1,184.08
Bureau of Indian Affairs	7	$7,722.00	$1,103.14
Education	45	$38,779.00	$861.76
USGS	31	$25,940.00	$836.77
NASA	314	$242,356.55	$771.84
EPA	1290	$973,024.81	$754.28
Federal Reserve	2	$1,482.00	$741.00
NOAA	291	$214,446.74	$736.93
Commerce	360	$265,080.00	$736.33

“It does not surprise me to hear that the Food and Drug Administration tops the Combined Federal Campaign list,” said agency COO and acting CIO Walter Harris. “FDA employees share in a collective mission to protect and promote public health and a natural extension of that mission is the improvement of lives and communities through philanthropic giving.”

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was close behind in second place with an average donation of $1,184. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) employees rounded out the top three, contributing an average of $1,103 per pledge.

The average donation across all agencies in 2013 was $362.92.

See our exclusive

Combined Federal Campaign 2014 Giver’s Guide

‘Universal Giving Program’ opens CFC contribution options

Aaron Boyd — Tue, 07 Oct 2014 16:07:10 +0000

In an effort to bring new and younger donors into the fold, regional Combined Federal Charity campaigns are reaching out on social media and making new contribution options available that take into account the broader global world in which we live.

Along with traditional payroll deductions, CFCs nationwide are adopting a Universal Giving Program that opens up donations to 24,000 charities across the country, not just organizations in the local regions.

“Previously, employees could give only to national charities or to charities in their CFC region,” National Director Keith Willingham said. “Universal giving allows federal employees to give to charitable organizations in their local community, as well as to charities in other parts of the country.”

In California, this Universal Giving Program has been of particular interest to active military.

“This option is especially beneficial for our military personnel who are usually far from their home and would like to support charities that they know and love ‘back home,’ ” said Central California Executive Director Susan Ground.

In the capital region, Executive Director Lou Nistler’s campaign is reaching out to younger federal employees who are more likely to use technology and give of their time rather than their money.

“Younger and newer federal employees represent the future of the campaign and it is essential that we make them part of the CFC family,” Nistler said. Along with social-media marketing, “We are also creating an innovative volunteer bulletin board that will provide federal workers with special volunteer opportunities. Research tells us that younger donors often give their time before they give financial contributions, so we think this volunteer bulletin board will serve as a great introduction to the campaign for millennials.”

“We are going to emphasize the small changes that can make a big difference in someone’s life,” said Lisa Makosewski, executive director of the Eastern Pennsylvania and South Jersey CFC. “Giving up one latte a week from the local coffee shop and donating the cost to the CFC instead will provide meals for 10 people for a day for every skipped latte. It doesn’t create a hardship for the donor and can mean everything to the recipient.”

In central California, Regional CFC Chairman James Fish and crew are encouraging federal employees to “Make it possible … be the one,” this year’s slogan.

“We are encouraging our employees to ‘be the one’ to continue the tradition of generosity in the federal workplace,” he said. “Even the smallest donation through payroll deductions will help charities throughout the year. With one simple pledge form, a federal employee can give to multiple charities and ‘make it possible.’ “

The theme for the National Capital Area CFC — the nation’s largest regional group — is similar: “I make it possible.”

“It hammers home the very real truth that federal employees make so much possible through their Combined Federal Campaign contributions,” Nistler said. “Our posters, campaign cards, training materials and videos feature federal works from the D.C. metro area and what each of them makes possible through the CFC.”