July 2010

Senators respond to industry on cybersecurity bill

Responding to accusations about privacy shortcomings and excessive regulation, Sens Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Thomas Carper (D-DE) defended their cybersecurity bill saying, "It is extremely misleading to argue that our legislation would grant the [National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications] any authority to monitor or compel the production of information from the private sector. Indeed, the legislation expressly states - in numerous places - that it would grant no authority to the federal government to conduct surveillance on private networks or compel the production of information."

The lawmakers also defended the bill from accusations that the minimum security requirements for private sector networks it establishes would result in excessive regulation. They also argue that DHS is the natural choice to protect the country's civilian networks. "The responsibility for protecting the American people from a large-scale domestic attack - in any form - is at the heart of DHS's mission," they state. "It has responsibility for securing our nation's critical infrastructure, and for protecting the government's 'dot-gov' domain. Quite simply, no other agency is as well-positioned as DHS to lead the cooperative effort set forth by Section 253."

Clarifying Cybersecurity Responsibilities

This memorandum outlines and clarifies the respective responsibilities and activities of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Cybersecurity Coordinator, and DHS, in particular with respect to the Federal Government's implementation of the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA; 44 U.S.C. §§ 3541-3549).

Under various national security and homeland security Presidential directives, and pursuant to its statutory authorities, DHS oversees critical infrastructure protection, operates the United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT), oversees implementation of the Trusted Internet Connection initiative, and takes other actions to help secure both the Federal civilian government systems and the private sector. At the same time, OMB has a number of cybersecurity responsibilities, principally in connection with FISMA. The Cybersecurity Coordinator leads the interagency process for cybersecurity strategy and policy development.

To clarify and avoid confusion, effective immediately, OMB will be responsible for the submission of the annual FISMA report to Congress, for the development and approval of the cybersecurity portions of the President's Budget, for the traditional OMB budgetary and fiscal oversight of the agencies' use of funds, and for coordination with the Cybersecurity Coordinator on all policy issues related to the prior three responsibilities. The Cybersecurity Coordinator will have visibility into DHS efforts to ensure Federal agency compliance with FISMA and will serve as the principal White House official to coordinate interagency cooperation with DHS cybersecurity efforts.

Six in ten Americans go online wirelessly using a laptop or cell phone

A May 2010 survey finds that six in ten American adults now go online wirelessly using either a mobile phone or a laptop with a wireless Internet connection. Americans are also taking advantage of a much wider range of cell phone data applications than at a similar point in 2009.

Cell phone and wireless laptop Internet use have each grown more prevalent over the last year. Nearly half of all adults (47%) go online with a laptop using a Wi-Fi connection or mobile broadband card (up from the 39% who did so as of April 2009) while 40% of adults use the Internet, email or instant messaging on a mobile phone (up from the 32% of Americans who did this in 2009). This means that 59% of adults now access the Internet wirelessly using a laptop or cell phone—that is, they answered "yes" to at least one of these wireless access pathways. That adds up to an increase from the 51% who used a laptop or cell phone wirelessly in April 2009.

The report also finds that the use of non-voice data applications on cell phones has grown dramatically over the last year. Compared with a similar point in 2009, cell phone owners are now more likely to use their mobile phones to:

Take pictures -- 76% now do this, up from 66% in April 2009
Send or receive text messages -- 72% vs. 65%
Access the Internet -- 38% vs. 25%
Play games -- 34% vs. 27%
Send or receive email -- 34% vs. 25%
Record a video -- 34% vs. 19%
Play music -- 33% vs. 21%
Send or receive instant messages -- 30% vs. 20%

Preserving Digital Public Television

After seven years of researching, testing, developing, analyzing, promoting and sharing, it is time to close out the Library of Congress-funded National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program project which set out to design a model repository for public television.

In the process, the project also determined standards for metadata, explored rights issues relating to video archives, analyzed operating costs, and brought a new consciousness about the importance of digital preservation to the public television system. Saving digital public television requires a new framework that brings preservation principles into emerging all-digital production and delivery environments, storage systems, and media asset management applications. It also demands a shift in public television's approach to preservation, based on the characteristics and behavior of digital files. With a collective effort, the public broadcasting system has a unique opportunity to stand at the forefront of this new domain, and to take on this challenge on behalf of future generations.

Cable's Reach, Revenue, Ratings Threaten Network TV's Supremacy

Any way you slice it -- reach, revenue, ratings, and respect -- cable is king. Today, with about 90% of Americans now subscribing in some form, basic cable is basically the norm. Revenue is rising, up 14% over the past two years, to $48 billion, compared with a 4% slump for broadcast channels, to $16 billion. "Broadcast television's audience share has been eaten away," says Bill Gorman, media analyst and cofounder of TV by the Numbers. "The danger to broadcast TV isn't the Internet -- it's cable." To set themselves apart in an increasingly cluttered cable box, channels often begin by targeting a niche audience and then push into the mainstream with original programming. Which midsize channels will bully their way into the top ranks? And which new networks have staying power?

NIST, IEEE Brief House Subcommittee on Progress in Smart Grid Standards

During a progress report to the House Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation, IEEE Fellow John McDonald told the lawmakers that ensuring stringent testing and certification and addressing cyber security and privacy of information are critical to successful implementation of the Smart Grid.

McDonald, who also is director of technical strategy and policy development for GE's Digital Energy business, said: "Also crucial to this undertaking are developing system architecture and standards that provide the essential foundation for bringing together the electrical and communications infrastructure, and for evolving technology to meet many and disparate needs. Both the IEEE through its Standards Association and NIST have already shown tremendous progress in these areas." George Arnold, national Smart Grid coordinator for NIST, and representatives of other groups also testified.

Groups Question FCC Data

New Networks Institute and TeleTruth filed a complaint entitled "Omnibus Data Quality Act Complaint Against All Phone, Broadband, Wireless, Cable and Internet Charges Since 2000," requesting the FCC suspend all National Broadband proceedings because the FCC's data is extremely flawed. New Networks and TeleTruth also filed a complaint entitled "Omnibus Data Quality Act Complaint Against All Data Since 2000 Used in the Regulatory Flexibility Act Analyses in All Current Dockets in 2010", asking the FCC to suspend all National Broadband Plan proceedings until it has fixed the marketplace data and analyses in all FCC Regulatory Flexibility Act analyses located in the appendix of every FCC proposed rulemaking. They also filed an Omnibus Data Quality Act Complaint Against All Broadband Data Since 2000.

Medical records go online, but at what cost to privacy?

Electronic medical records, or EMRs, are quickly becoming a reality for doctors and hospitals. If EMRs work, they'll be high-tech marvels -- letting patients access their own medical records on their home computers, helping doctors coordinate tests with each other to avoid duplication, giving medical researchers access to millions of medical records.

There are drawbacks. Patient advocates worry that EMRs could pose a threat to privacy. Doctors and hospitals say they're not being given enough time to set up the complex electronic systems or enough financial help to pay for them. The systems can cost $50 million to $100 million for hospitals and $15,000 to $50,000 for private doctors. But the potential pluses outweigh those complaints, many doctors and hospitals believe. The new systems are voluntary, but federal financial incentives for using them and penalties for failing to do so have most medical officials at least resigned to making the change.

What Do WiMax, WiFi, Bluetooth and VOIP All Have In Common? A Very Active "Afterlife."

With the rise of LTE, we find great woe and tearing of hair among the supporters of WiMax. Intel, long a WiMAX booster, closed it's Taiwan WiMax office and it seems you can't swing a dead iPad these days without hitting another story about WiMax's woes and its upcoming demise in the face of LTE. There is a lamentable tendency among analysts and trade reporters to confuse "technology" with "business model." WiMAX, like WiFi and bluetooth, are technologies. They have particular uses. A number of early adopters, equipment makers, and investors hoped that these technologies would facilitate certain business models and use these business model predictions to promote the new technology. Reporters and analysts promptly confuse the two, often further compounding the error by swooning over ridiculous business model predictions, then rushing to declare the technology dead once the far-too-optimistic business predictions come to pass. This promptly creates an investment opportunity for those able to distinguish between technology and business model and hype from substance and adoption.

A 'Public Option' for Broadband?

[Commentary] When it comes to broadband, Sullivan is a socialist. Why? Because broadband service in the United States is currently provided by a cableco/telco duopoly, and, as such, is slower and more expensive than in most of the developed world, studies show. Because he doesn't believe the Federal Communications Commission can fix that lack of competition within the current regulatory framework, despite the ambitious goals set forth in its National Broadband Plan.

Because a reasonably-priced alternative to cable or telco broadband might be just the thing to bring competition to the industry and spur U.S. broadband cost and quality to world-class levels. Because our connectedness increasingly dictates our economic standing in the world: Broadband is as important to us as the interstate highway system--a public works project--was to Eisenhower-era America. The broadband service itself would be basic. Since the FCC has set a goal for broadband service to be universally available at 4 mbps downstream and 1 mbps upstream by 2020, so why not set the bar there for the minimum speed requirement of the public plan? If people or small businesses wanted faster or fuller-featured broadband service, they could easily pay extra for higher tiers of service from the private ISP of their choice. But the public option would always be there as a safety net. This, of course, would be a massive undertaking on the scale of, say, Medicare. But given the growing importance of broadband access for all, shouldn't it be considered?

Benton

Search