Category Archives: NSA Spying

Do the Russians have the Voting Machines Source Codes?

Posted on by

On February 28th, the Senate asks what NSA and Cyber Command are doing about Russian election interference. Admiral Rogers’s answer, in brief, is that his organizations lack the authorities to do much (that he can openly discuss, that is).

US senator grills CEO over the myth of the hacker-proof voting machine
Nation’s biggest voting machine maker reportedly relies on remote-access software.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Two Democratic senators on Wednesday asked major vendors of U.S. voting equipment whether they have allowed Russian entities to scrutinize their software, saying the practice could allow Moscow to hack into American elections infrastructure.

The letter from Senators Amy Klobuchar and Jeanne Shaheen followed a series of Reuters reports saying that several major global technology providers have allowed Russian authorities to hunt for vulnerabilities in software deeply embedded across the U.S. government.

The senators requested that the three largest election equipment vendors – Election Systems & Software, Dominion Voting Systems and Hart Intercivic – answer whether they have shared source code, or inner workings, or other sensitive data about their technology with any Russian entity.

They also asked whether any software on those companies’ products had been shared with Russia and for the vendors to explain what steps they have taken to improve the security of those products against cyber threats to the election.

The vendors could not immediately be reached for comment. It was not immediately clear whether any of the vendors had made sales in Russia, where votes are submitted via written ballots and usually counted by hand.

“According to voting machine testing and certification from the Election Assistance Commission, most voting machines contain software from firms which were alleged to have shared their source code with Russian entities,” the senators wrote. “We are deeply concerned that such reviews may have presented an opportunity for Russian intelligence agents looking to attack or hack the United States’ elections infrastructure.”

U.S. voters in November will go to the polls in midterm elections, which American intelligence officials have warned could be targeted by Russia or others seeking to disrupt the process.

There is intense scrutiny of the security of U.S. election systems after a 2016 presidential race in which Russia interfered, according to American intelligence agencies, to try to help Donald Trump win with presidency. Trump in the past has been publicly skeptical about Russian election meddling, and Russia has denied the allegations.

Twenty-one states experienced probing of their systems by Russian hackers during the 2016 election, according to U.S. officials.

Though a small number of networks were compromised, voting machines were not directly affected and there remains no evidence any vote was altered, according to U.S. officials and security experts.

Related reading:

Top intel official says US hasn’t deterred Russian meddling (Fifth Domain) “I believe that President (Vladimir) Putin has clearly come to the conclusion that there’s little price to pay and that therefore, ‘I can continue this activity,‘” Adm. Mike Rogers, director of both the U.S. Cyber Command and the National Security Agency, told Congress.

Senators: Cyber Command should disrupt Russian influence campaigns (Fifth Domain) Senators pressed Cyber Command on how they can use their national mission force to combat Russian cyber intrusions.

Rogers: CyberCom lacks authority, resources to defend all of cyberspace (FCW) The outgoing NSA and U.S. Cyber Command chief told lawmakers CyberCom is not sitting on its hands when it comes to potential Russian cyber interference, but it lacks the authority to do more absent additional presidential direction.

NSA: Trump’s Lukewarm Response on Russia Will Embolden Putin (Infosecurity Magazine) NSA: Trump’s Lukewarm Response on Russia Will Embolden Putin. Expect more election interference, Cyber Command boss warns

Decoding NSA director Mike Rogers’ comments on countering Russian cyberattacks (Washington Examiner) It’s not as simple as ‘I’m not authorized to do anything.’

*** Footnotes:

Electronic Systems and Software:

1. In 2014, ES&S claimed that “in the past decade alone,” it had installed more than 260,000 voting systems, more than 15,000 electronic poll books, provided services to more than 75,000 elections. The company has installed statewide voting systems in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, and West Virginia. ES&S claims a U.S. market share of more than 60 percent in customer voting system installations.

The company maintains 10 facilities in the United States, two field offices in Canada (Pickering, Ontario; and Vancouver, British Columbia) and a warehouse in Jackson, Mississippi.

2. Dominion Voting Systems is a global provider of end-to-end election tabulation solutions and services. The company’s international headquarters are in Toronto, Canada, and its U.S. headquarters are in Denver, Colorado. Dominion Voting also maintains a number of additional offices and facilities in the U.S. and Europe.

Dominion’s technology is currently used in 33 U.S. states, including more than 2,000 customer jurisdictions. The company also has 100+ municipal customers in Canada.

3. Hart InterCivic Inc. is a privately held United States company that provides elections, and print solutions to jurisdictions nationwide. While headquartered in Austin, Texas, Hart products are used by hundreds of jurisdictions nationwide, including counties in Texas, the entire states of Hawaii and Oklahoma, half of Washington and Colorado, and certain counties in Ohio, California, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.

Hart entered the elections industry in 1912, printing ballots for Texas counties. (Side note: As Republican and Democratic state legislators hustle to pass a law moving Georgia toward paper ballot voting technology, election integrity advocates said they’re concerned a bill that already cleared the state Senate could lead to a new vulnerability in Georgia’s next voting system, if it becomes law.

One way a new system might work is through a touchscreen computer similar to those currently used in Georgia. It would print a paper ballot with a visual representation of a voter’s choices so they themselves can check for accuracy.

In some systems, counting the votes means scanning an entire image of the ballot that may include a timestamp and precinct information.

In other systems, barcodes or QR codes on a ballot would correspond with the voter’s choices, which can make counting easier and faster for election officials, said Peter Lichtenheld, vice president of operations with Hart Intercivic, one of several election technology companies that hired lobbyists at the statehouse this year.)

*** The text of the letter to the three vendors is below:

The full text of the senators’ letter is below:

Dear Mr. Braithwaite, Mr. Burt, and Mr. Poulos:

Recent reports of U.S. IT and software companies submitting to source code reviews in order to access foreign markets have raised concern in Congress given the sensitivity of the information requested by countries like China and the Russian Federation. As such, we write to inquire about the security of the voting machines you manufacture and whether your company has been asked to share the source code or other sensitive or proprietary details associated with your voting machines with the Russian Federation.

The U.S. intelligence community has confirmed that Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential elections. As a part of a multi-pronged effort, Russian actors attempted to hack a U.S. voting software company and at least 21 states’ election systems. According to the Chicago Board of Elections, information on thousands of American voters was exposed after an attack on their voter registration system.

Foreign access to critical source code information and sensitive data continues to be an often overlooked vulnerability. The U.S. government and Congress have recently taken steps to address some cyber vulnerabilities, including by banning the use Kaspersky Lab, a Moscow-based cybersecurity firm that has maintained a relationship with Russia’s military and intelligence sectors, from all U.S. government computers. Now, we must also ensure the security of our voting machines and associated software.

Recent reports indicate that U.S. based firms operating on U.S. government platforms gave Russian authorities access to their software. In order to sell their software within Russia, these companies allowed Russian authorities to review their source code for flaws that could be exploited. While some companies maintain this practice is necessary to find defects in software code, experts have warned that it could jeopardize the security of U.S. government computers if these reviews are conducted by hostile actors or nations. U.S. tech companies, the Pentagon, former U.S. security officials, and a former U.S. Department of Commerce official with knowledge of the source code review process have expressed concerns with this practice.

In addition, Russia’s requests for source code reviews have increased. According to eight current and former U.S. officials, four company executives, three U.S. trade attorneys, and Russian regulatory documents, between 1996 and 2013 Russia conducted reviews for 13 technology products from Western companies, but has conducted 28 such reviews in the past three years alone.

As the three largest election equipment vendors, your companies provide voting machines and software used by ninety-two percent of the eligible voting population in the U.S. According to voting machine testing and certification from the Election Assistance Commission, most voting machines contain software from firms which were alleged to have shared their source code with Russian entities. We are deeply concerned that such reviews may have presented an opportunity for Russian intelligence agents looking to attack or hack the United States’ elections infrastructure.  Further, if such vulnerabilities are not quickly examined and mitigated, future elections will also remain vulnerable to attack.

In order to help the security and integrity of our systems and to understand the scope of any potential access points into our elections infrastructure, we respectfully request answers to the following questions:

  1. Have you shared your source code or any other sensitive data related to your voting machines or other products with any Russian entity?
  2. To your knowledge, has any of the software that runs on your products been shared with any Russian entity?
  3. What steps have you taken or will you take in order to upgrade existing technologies in light of the increased threat against our elections?

The 2018 election season is upon us. Primaries have already begun and time is of the essence to ensure any security vulnerabilities are addressed before 2018 and 2020.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and we look forward to working with you to secure our elections.

Sincerely,

 

Cyber: ‘Our adversaries have grown more emboldened’

Posted on by

Primer:

Russia hasn’t been sufficiently penalized for its meddling in the 2016 U.S. elections and that has emboldened Moscow to continue interfering in American elections, Adm. Michael Rogers, Commander of the U.S. Cyber Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday.

“They haven’t paid a price sufficient to change their behavior,” Rogers said under questioning by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. Although the United States has taken some actions, including imposing additional sanctions and Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III has indicted more than a dozen Russians for their role in the interference, “it hasn’t changed the calculus,” Rogers said, adding that “it hasn’t generated the change in behavior that we all know we need.”

In another exchange with Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., Rogers said that Russian President Vladimir Putin has probably come to the conclusion that “that there’s little price to pay here so I can continue the activity” of interfering in the U.S. election system. More here.

*** In context however, where is Senator(s) Warren and Blumenthal’s proposed legislation on sanctions or punishment toward Russia for cyber and active measures interference? It was political posturing by Warren and Blumenthal when they can introduce multi-faceted legislation as Russia, China and North Korea continue to attack the United States via layered cyber operations including espionage.

Meanwhile…. Image result for admiral rogers nsa photo

WASHINGTON, Feb. 27, 2018 —

Although competitors such as China and Russia remain the greatest threat to U.S. security, rogue regimes such as Iran and North Korea have increased in capabilities and have begun using aggressive methods to conduct malicious cyberspace activities, the military’s top cyber officer told Congress today.

Navy Adm. Michael S. Rogers, director of the National Security Agency, commander of U.S. Cyber Command and chief of the Central Security Service, testified at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.

“Our adversaries have grown more emboldened, conducting increasingly aggressive activities to extend their influence without fear of significant consequence,” Rogers said. “We must change our approaches and responses here if we are to change this dynamic.”

But as the cyber domain has evolved, Rogers told the senators, Cybercom’s three major mission areas endure: protecting the Department of Defense Information Network; enabling other joint force commanders by delivering effects in and through cyberspace; and defending the nation against cyber threats through support to the Department of Homeland Security and others when directed to do so by the president or secretary of defense.

Cybercom Milestones

Rogers highlighted milestones in Cybercom’s growth.

Joint Force Headquarters DODIN, the subordinate headquarters responsible for securing, operating and defending the Defense Department’s complex information technology infrastructure, has achieved full operational capability, he said.

Joint Task Force Ares, created to lead the fight in cyber against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, has successfully integrated cyberspace operations into broader military campaigns, has achieved some “excellent results,” and will continue to pursue ISIS in support of the nation’s objectives, the admiral told the Senate panel.

Cybercom also has significantly enhanced training in cyber operation platforms to prepare the battlespace against key adversaries, he said.

Milestones expected to be achieved this year include Cyber Command’s elevation to a combatant command responsible for providing mission-ready cyberspace operations forces to other combatant commanders, Rogers said.

New Facility

In addition, the admiral said, Cybercom will be moving into a state-of-the-art integrated cyber center and joint operations facility at Fort Meade, Maryland, enhancing the coordination and planning of operations against cyber threats.

“Without cyberspace superiority in today’s battlefield, risk to mission increases across all domains and endangers our security,” Rogers said.

Cybercom’s focus on innovation and rapid tech development has extended all the way to small businesses and working with the private sector while maintaining cybersecurity, Rogers told the committee.

“We intend in the coming year to create an unclassified collaboration venue where businesses and academia can help us tackle tough problems without needing to jump over clearance hurdles, for example, which for many are very difficult barriers,” Rogers explained.

After serving more than four years as a commander of Cybercom and after nearly 37 years of service as a naval officer, Rogers is set to retire this spring.

“I will do all I can during the intervening period to ensure the mission continues, that our men and women remain ever motivated, and that we have a smooth transition,” he said.

Estimating the Costs of Cyber Attacks Against the U.S., Billions

Posted on by

Image result for cyber attacks against the united states 2018

photo

Cyberattacks cost the United States between $57 billion and $109 billion in 2016

The report published by the White House Council of Economic Advisers examines the cyberattacks cost that malicious cyber activities cause to the U.S. economy.

Paganini: How much cost cyber attacks to the US? According to a report published by the White House Council of Economic Advisers last week, the cyberattacks cost between $57 billion and $109 billion in 2016, and things can go worse in the future.

“This report examines the substantial economic costs that malicious cyber activity imposes on the U.S. economy. Cyber threats are ever-evolving and may come from sophisticated adversaries. Due to common vulnerabilities, instances of security breaches occur across firms and in patterns that are difficult to anticipate.” states the report.

“Firms in critical infrastructure sectors may generate especially large negative spillover effects into the wider economy.”

The report analyzed the impact of malicious cyber activities on public and private entities, including DoS attacks, sabotage, business disruption, and theft of proprietary data, intellectual property, and sensitive financial and strategic information.

Damages and losses caused by a cyber attack may spill over from the initial target to economically linked organizations. More exposed are critical infrastructure sectors, at attack against companies and organization in this industry could have a severe impact on the US economy.

The document warns of nation-state actors such as Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, that are well funded and often conduct sophisticated targeted attacks for both sabotage and cyber espionage.

“Finally, and perhaps most important, if a firm owns a critical infrastructure asset, an attack against this firm could cause major disruption throughout the economy.” reads the report.

“Insufficient cybersecurity investment in these sectors exacerbates the risks of cyberattacks and data breaches. The economic implications of attacks against critical infrastructure assets are described in more detail later in the paper. “

US cyberattacls cost

The reports also warn of devastating cyberattacks that would target sectors that are internally interconnected and interdependent with other sectors.

The report offered little in the way of new recommendations on improving cybersecurity, but noted that the situation is hurt by “insufficient data” as well as “underinvestment” in defensive systems by the private sector.

“Cyber connectivity is an important driver of productivity, innovation, and growth for the U.S. economy, but it comes at a cost. Companies, individuals, and the government are vulnerable to malicious cyber activity.” concludes the report. “Effective public and private-sector efforts to combat this malicious activity would contribute to domestic GDP growth. However, the ever-evolving nature and scope of cyber threats suggest that additional and continued efforts are critical, and the cooperation between public and private sectors is key.” 

***

The forecast of the cost damage in coming years….

In part from Forbes: In 2015, the British insurance company Lloyd’s estimated that cyber attacks cost businesses as much as $400 billion a year, which includes direct damage plus post-attack disruption to the normal course of business. Some vendor and media forecasts over the past year put the cybercrime figure as high as $500 billion and more.

From 2013 to 2015 the cyber crime costs quadrupled, and it looks like there will be another quadrupling from 2015 to 2019. Juniper research recently predicted that the rapid digitization of consumers’ lives and enterprise records will increase the cost of data breaches to $2.1 trillion globally by 2019, increasing to almost four times the estimated cost of breaches in 2015.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) says a significant portion of cybercrime goes undetected, particularly industrial espionage where access to confidential documents and data is difficult to spot. Those crimes would arguably move the needle on the cyber crime numbers much higher.

Large banks, retailers, and federal agencies make the headlines when they are hacked – but all businesses are at risk. According to Microsoft, 20% of small to mid sized businesses have been cyber crime targets.

For anyone who wants to tally their own bill from cyber crime, check out Cyber Tab from Booz Allen. It is an anonymous, free tool that helps information security and other senior executives understand the damage to companies inflicted by cyber crime and attacks. More here.

 

Where is the Legislation/Law Mandating Against Cyber Intrusions?

Posted on by

No one in Washington DC or media talks about the ever constant cyber attacks against all things United States.

There have been countless hearings on The Hill about Russian operations against the election architecture in the United States as well as other allied countries. While Russia is one of the top threats, Iran and North Korea are also guilty, yet China likely ranks number two behind Russia.

So, anti-Trump people inside the Beltway blame the Trump White House for the lack of leadership on the issue(s) especially when it comes to protections on the voter-roll databases at the state level and the learning curve of vulnerabilities of the voting machines themselves. So…where are these lawmakers and the bills they have introduced for debate, committee and eventual passage in both Houses of Congress anyway?

Who is protecting data across the board, our data? Where is the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI on the matter? Both those agencies were assigned to collaborate with threatened State Elections Commissions during the General election. Remember that?

This all began during the Obama administration where the ultimate punishment was to expel Russian diplomatic officials, close two dachas and the Russian compound in San Francisco. Has that sent a message to Moscow and fixed the problem(s)? NO….

There are thousands of experts outside the Federal government that do offer assistance with investigations and attributions and they too can offer some in sight into legislative frameworks and yet no one knows if that has been forthcoming.

*** Russian Attacks Will Continue

UPDATE: As the nation’s top intelligence chiefs testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee Tuesday, spelling out the very real threat Russia continues to pose to our democracy, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats admitted “there is no single agency leading the United States’ efforts to respond to and combat Russian election meddling.”

Multiple Senators on the panel expressed their concern for President Trump’s ongoing unwillingness to acknowledge Russian interference in the 2016 election, echoing a common sentiment among national security experts that an absence of leadership at the top is hindering U.S. efforts to fight back.

CNN:

… Coats said Tuesday “there should be no doubt” that Russia sees the 2018 US elections as a target.

Coats and the other top national security officials told the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday that they still view Moscow as a threat to the 2018 elections, a stance that appears at odds with President Donald Trump’s repeated dismissals of Russian election meddling.

“We expect Russia to continue using propaganda, social media, false-flag personas, sympathetic spokesmen and other means to influence, to try to build on its wide range of operations and exacerbate social and political fissures in the United States,” Coats said at a hearing on worldwide threats. “There should be no doubt that Russia perceives its past efforts as successful and views the 2018 US midterm elections as a potential target for Russian influence operations.”

(…)

Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, pressed on the disparity between the intelligence community’s viewpoint and the president’s — urging the intelligence chiefs to persuade the president to accept their findings that Russia interfered in the 2016 election.

“My problem is, I talk to people in Maine who say the whole thing is a witch hunt and a hoax ‘because the President told me’,” King said. “There’s no doubt, as you all have testified today, we cannot confront this threat, which is a serious one, with a whole of government response when the leader of the government continues to that deny it exists.”

The Atlantic:

John Sipher, a former chief of station for the CIA who served for 28 years in Russia, Europe, and Asia, told me that the intelligence community will continue to be focused on Russia’s threat “no matter what the White House says or doesn’t say.” Ultimately, though, it will be up to Trump to implement meaningful changes.

“The IC is not the most important in this case,” Sipher said, referring to the intelligence community. “They may uncover what the Russians are up to but they can’t really defend against it or take actions to deter it, unless the President supports a covert action effort to screw with the Russians, like with a cyber attack.”

“Tightening up our social media, protecting voter-registration systems and procedures—those things are beyond the ability or mandate of the IC,” Sipher said. “And I don’t think we have done nearly enough to deter or defend against Russian attacks.

US intel chiefs unanimous that Russia is targeting 2018 elections (CNN)

Russia Will Meddle in the Midterms (The Atlantic)

No Agency Leading U.S. Response to Russian Election Meddling, Says Intel Chief (The Daily Beast)

As the Senate Intelligence Committee hears from the nation’s top intelligence and national security officials on worldwide threats, a prepared written assessment warns of ongoing Russian efforts to undermine democracy.

NBC News:

“Foreign elections are critical inflection points that offer opportunities for Russia to advance its interests both overtly and covertly,” says the assessment. “The 2018 US mid-term elections are a potential target for Russian influence operations.”

(…)

“We assess that the Russian intelligence services will continue their efforts to disseminate false information via Russian state-controlled media and covert online personas about US activities to encourage anti-US political views,” the statement says.

“Moscow seeks to create wedges that reduce trust and confidence in democratic processes, degrade democratization efforts, weaken US partnerships with European allies, undermine Western sanctions, encourage anti-US political views, and counter efforts to bring Ukraine and other former Soviet states into European institutions.”

In his opening statement, Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-VA) noted President Trump’s absence of leadership on the issue.

Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the top Democrat on the committee, said in prepared remarks that “the President inconceivably continues to deny the threat posed by Russia. He didn’t increase sanctions on Russia when he had a chance to do so. He hasn’t even Tweeted a single concern. This threat demands a whole-of-government response, and that needs to start with leadership at the top.”

U.S. intel agencies expect Russia to escalate election meddling efforts (NBC News)

Worldwide Threat Assessment (pdf)

State Dept Proposes Lead Agency on Economic/Cyber Bureau

Posted on by

This sounds great until one considers there is no lawful cyber policy against any nation, rogue or otherwise where there are consequences for hacks, malicious malware or cyber theft. Meanwhile, all cyber units within the Federal government as well as independent outside corporations are well aware of China, North Korea, Russia and proxies are the constant and proven cyber threats to the United States without punishment.

Further, there are two details that are omitted in the summary below, the global actions of cybercurrencies and how governments are plotting regulations but more the global economic agenda. There is no way to stop a borderless world.

The 2016 State Department posture on foreign cyber threats is here.

Image result for tillerson russia cyber photo

Tillerson proposes new unified bureau at State to focus on cyber

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is proposing the consolidation of two separate offices at the State Department to form a single bureau that will focus on a wide range of cyber issues.

A State Department spokesperson told The Hill that the two offices, the Office of the Cybersecurity Coordinator and the Bureau of Economic Affairs’ Office of International Communications and Information Policy, would be unified in order to form the proposed Bureau for Cyberspace and the Digital Economy.

“The combination of these offices in a new Bureau for Cyberspace and the Digital Economy will align existing resources under a single Department of State official to formulate and coordinate a strategic approach necessary to address current and emerging cyber security and digital economic challenges,” Tillerson said in a Tuesday letter to House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-Calif.). 

“The Department of State must be organized to lead diplomatic efforts related to all aspects of cyberspace,” the secretary added.

The decision comes after Tillerson faced scrutiny from both parties last year over his decision to fold the standalone Office of Cybersecurity Coordinator into an economic-focused bureau as part of his broad efforts to reorganize the agency.

Royce first relayed the news during a cyber diplomacy briefing on Tuesday that focused on the need to engage the international community on cybersecurity-related issues.

“The proposal will elevate the stature of the department official leading cyberspace policy to one that is confirmed by the U.S. Senate — an assistant secretary — to lead high-level diplomatic engagements around the world,” the secretary argued.

Last year, Royce introduced a bill, titled the Cyber Diplomacy Act, that seeks to restore a State Department office specifically focusing on cyber diplomacy efforts. The House passed the bill last month, which also calls for the official leading the cyber office to have the rank of ambassador.

Royce said Tillerson’s proposal is a “welcomed” move, but continued to vouch for the Cyber Diplomacy Act to “help keep America safe and strong.”

“Cyberspace is vital to America’s national security, and to our economy. That’s why I have long called for the State Department to have a high-ranking diplomat who can confront the full range of challenges we face online,” Royce said in a statement in response to Tillerson’s letter.

“The Foreign Affairs Committee will continue to work with the department and our colleagues in the Senate to ensure this assistant secretary and bureau is empowered to engage on the full range of cyber issues, dealing with security, human rights, and the economy,” he continued.

A State Department spokesperson said the proposal is part of an effort to spearhead cyber policy and address cybersecurity on a global scale.

“The State Department recognizes its leadership role of diplomatic efforts related to all aspects of cyberspace and the need to have an effective platform from which to engage relevant global stakeholders and exercise that leadership role,” the spokesperson said.

Under Tillerson’s proposal, the cyber bureau would seek to establish a “global deterrence framework” in an effort to outline how countries can respond when other nations “engage in malicious cyber activities.”

It would also seek to develop strategies against adversaries, promote programs that help with cyber threat prevention and responses, establish partnerships to keep the nature of the Internet open with a cross-border flow of data and open lines of dialogue for diplomatic officials to further engage on such issues.

At the start of the hearing, Royce emphasized the importance of the State Department’s role in cybersecurity issues as other countries attempt to impose control over cyberspace.

“The department’s role becomes essential when you consider that it’s not just computer networks and infrastructure that the United States needs to protect. The open nature of the internet is increasingly under assault by authoritarian regimes, like China, that aggressively promote a vision of ‘cyber sovereignty,’ which emphasizes state control over cyberspace,” Royce said in his opening remarks.

Three cyber experts testified before the lawmakers for roughly three hours on Tuesday, including the State Department’s former top cyber diplomat.

Chris Painter, the agency’s former cybersecurity coordinator, had already emphasized the need for the State Department to assume a key role in cyber policy before Tillerson’s proposal became public.

“[G]iven the international nature of the threats and the technology itself, that the State Department should play a leading role in that effort and that effective cyber diplomacy,” Painter told the lawmakers.

“For the U.S. to continue to lead, as it must, cyber issues must be re-prioritized and appropriately resourced at the State Department. Moreover, it is important that the position of the individual leading these efforts be at a very high-level — not buried in the bureaucracy or reporting through any one functionally or perspective limited chain of command,” he added.

Under the proposal, an assistant secretary will lead the new bureau and report to the Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment.

Painter praised Tillerson’s plan after Royce relayed Tillerson’s proposal at the hearing. But he argued that it “makes a lot more sense” for the assistant secretary to report to the undersecretary for political affairs rather than economic affairs.

“I applaud the fact that they’ve taken action. I think it’s great they’re elevating it. That’s exactly what should be done,” Painter said.

In July, Painter left his top position shortly before Tillerson alerted Congress about his plans to close the cybersecurity office.