Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Risk

7/7/2010
02:25 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Government Auditors Urge Clearer Cybersecurity R&D Strategy

The government needs better leadership and more cohesive direction on cybersecurity R&D, according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office.

The federal government needs to do more to come up with a comprehensive strategy for funding and carrying out research and development of new cybersecurity technologies, according to a new report by the Government Accountability Office.

Cybersecurity R&D is currently a multi-headed set of initiatives within government. The report lists, in addition to the breadth of executive agencies, 14 different organizations involved in oversight and coordination of cybersecurity R&D, with various hands in a dizzying array of pots, and five agencies actually funding and conducting most of the government's cybersecurity R&D.

For example, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and the President's Information Technology Advisory Committee both advise the President on technology policy, the Office of the Cybersecurity Coordinator works closely with other top IT officials as well as the National Economic Council and National Security Council on cybersecurity policy, OSTP advises the President on budget formation, and a Cyber Security and Information Assurance Interagency working Group facilitates interagency program planning around cybersecurity.

Any number of government organizations have issued guidance on cybersecurity research and development, including the two Presidential advisory committees, the White House itself, and the Department of Homeland Security.

The report notes that officials within the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy's Subcommittee on Networking and Information Technology (NITRD) are endowed with a leadership role in terms of coordinating cybersecurity R&D efforts, they haven't taken advantage of that role. Despite GAO recommendations and responsibilities laid out in legislation, NITRD has never prioritized a national or federal R&D agenda.

The report recommends that the White House follow the Bush administration's National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace, which urged the creation of near-term, mid-term and long-term goals for cybersecurity R&D. The report notes that OSTP is only in the beginning stages of creating such an agenda and updating its 5-year plan for cybersecurity R&D.

For example, NITRD held a conference last year to discuss cybersecurity R&D funding, but that event did not lead to clear next steps that NITRD plans to take. Not until recently, in May, did NITRD disclose plans to develop a cybersecurity R&D agenda that focuses on three priorities for cybersecurity R&D, and GAO cautioned that that plan doesn't address all the priorities that should be in such an agenda.

"For example, among other things, issues such as global-scale identity management and computer forensics are not included in this framework," the report says. "Until NITRD exercises its leadership responsibilities, federal agencies will lack overall direction for cybersecurity R&D."

In terms of funding, the National Science Foundation's Trustworthy Computing Program, Department of Homeland Security's Science and Technology Directorate, and several programs at the Department of Defense, Department of Energy and National Institute for Standards and Technology are the biggest spenders on cybersecurity R&D.

However, the report scolds the government for not yet following through with an eight-year-old Congressional requirement under the E-Government Act of 2002 to create a database that tracks R&D funding and for thus obscuring how much is really spent on cybersecurity R&D.

The report also notes that there's no formal, ongoing process in place for sharing key information on R&D initiatives between the private sector and the public sector, which means that companies won't know where the government's focus is and will likely invest in their own interest rather than in the national interest. In addition, gaps in research are therefore more difficult to identify.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Mobile Banking Malware Up 50% in First Half of 2019
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/17/2020
Exploits Released for As-Yet Unpatched Critical Citrix Flaw
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  1/13/2020
Microsoft to Officially End Support for Windows 7, Server 2008
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/13/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
The Year in Security: 2019
This Tech Digest provides a wrap up and overview of the year's top cybersecurity news stories. It was a year of new twists on old threats, with fears of another WannaCry-type worm and of a possible botnet army of Wi-Fi routers. But 2019 also underscored the risk of firmware and trusted security tools harboring dangerous holes that cybercriminals and nation-state hackers could readily abuse. Read more.
Flash Poll
[Just Released] How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
[Just Released] How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Organizations have invested in a sweeping array of security technologies to address challenges associated with the growing number of cybersecurity attacks. However, the complexity involved in managing these technologies is emerging as a major problem. Read this report to find out what your peers biggest security challenges are and the technologies they are using to address them.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-7227
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-18
Westermo MRD-315 1.7.3 and 1.7.4 devices have an information disclosure vulnerability that allows an authenticated remote attacker to retrieve the source code of different functions of the web application via requests that lack certain mandatory parameters. This affects ifaces-diag.asp, system.asp, ...
CVE-2019-15625
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-18
A memory usage vulnerability exists in Trend Micro Password Manager 3.8 that could allow an attacker with access and permissions to the victim's memory processes to extract sensitive information.
CVE-2019-19696
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-18
A RootCA vulnerability found in Trend Micro Password Manager for Windows and macOS exists where the localhost.key of RootCA.crt might be improperly accessed by an unauthorized party and could be used to create malicious self-signed SSL certificates, allowing an attacker to misdirect a user to phishi...
CVE-2019-19697
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-18
An arbitrary code execution vulnerability exists in the Trend Micro Security 2019 (v15) consumer family of products which could allow an attacker to gain elevated privileges and tamper with protected services by disabling or otherwise preventing them to start. An attacker must already have administr...
CVE-2019-20357
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-18
A Persistent Arbitrary Code Execution vulnerability exists in the Trend Micro Security 2020 (v160 and 2019 (v15) consumer familiy of products which could potentially allow an attacker the ability to create a malicious program to escalate privileges and attain persistence on a vulnerable system.