Threat Intelligence

2/27/2018
03:36 PM
50%
50%

NSA's Rogers: No White House Request for Action Against Russian Hacking

US Cyber Command head Michael Rogers told US Senate Armed Services Committee that actions to deter Russian hackers from interfering with upcoming US elections requires an order from the White House.

NSA director and US Cyber Command head Admiral Michael Rogers today testified in an open hearing of the US Senate Armed Services Committee that his agency has not been asked to do anything about Russian hackers targeting the US election system. Rogers told the committee that he doesn't "have the day-to-day authority" to authorize activity to counter the attacks, according to a Politico report.

A request for direct action would have to come from the President, through the Secretary of Defense. This is the second time in a month that the head of a US security agency has confirmed that no request to address Russian election interference has come from the White House. In testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Feb. 13, Rogers, FBI Director Christopher Wray, CIA Director Mike Pompeo, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Robert Ashley, and National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency Director Robert Cardillo, all confirmed that Russia had used "active measures" against the integrity of the 2016 US election and the upcoming 2018 elections are a significant potential target.

Rogers said Russia continues to target the US election process in part because "... they haven’t paid a price ... that is sufficient to get them to change their behavior." He also confirmed that he has shared with individuals in the Trump administration his opinion on the attacks and what might be done to stop them. But Rogers said he has neither asked for, nor volunteered, a formal plan in writing.

When asked whether it might be possible to stop the cyberattacks at their point of origin, rather than simply working on a US endpoint defense, Rogers said that he felt a plan to do so could be developed that was both legal and implementable. As to whether it would be effective, Rogers was more cautious: "It depends on the specifics," he said. "I don't want to over-promise."

Read more here.

Here is a video clip from CSPAN of Rogers' testimony today:

 

 

Black Hat Asia returns to Singapore with hands-on technical Trainings, cutting-edge Briefings, Arsenal open-source tool demonstrations, top-tier solutions and service providers in the Business Hall. Click for information on the conference and to register.

 

Dark Reading's Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
jbconner
50%
50%
jbconner,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/28/2018 | 1:01:38 PM
SO he's admitting that he is not doing his job?
"his agency has not been asked to do anything about Russian hackers targeting the US election system. Rogers told the committee that he doesn't "have the day-to-day authority" to authorize activity to counter the attacks"

"He also confirmed that he has shared with individuals in the Trump administration his opinion on the attacks and what might be done to stop them."

"But Rogers said he has neither asked for, nor volunteered, a formal plan in writing."

Isn't it his job to develop a formal plan of exactly what his agency would do to combat this threat and then formally submit that in writing to the White House for approval? Does he sit around always waiting for someone to request that he do his job, and doesn't do anything until then? Shouldn't the heads of all the intelligence agencies be constantly developing plans to deal with not only this threat, but all other threats to national security? And if they don't have the authority to implement those plans, then submit those plans to the commander-in-chief and the White House for approval? And not just tell a few people about their opinions?

If they did that and the request was turned down by the White House, then this would be a different story. But as is, it is partisan BS being pushed by media bias.

If someone asked me what I was doing to prevent a breach into my organization, and I said that I haven't had any request from my executive officers for any action to prevent a breach, so I'm not developing a plan to submit to them for approval, I would be justifiably FIRED for not doing my job.
Higher Education: 15 Books to Help Cybersecurity Pros Be Better
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  12/12/2018
'PowerSnitch' Hacks Androids via Power Banks
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  12/8/2018
Worst Password Blunders of 2018 Hit Organizations East and West
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  12/12/2018
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
10 Best Practices That Could Reshape Your IT Security Department
This Dark Reading Tech Digest, explores ten best practices that could reshape IT security departments.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-14623
PUBLISHED: 2018-12-14
A SQL injection flaw was found in katello's errata-related API. An authenticated remote attacker can craft input data to force a malformed SQL query to the backend database, which will leak internal IDs. This is issue is related to an incomplete fix for CVE-2016-3072. Version 3.10 and older is vulne...
CVE-2018-18093
PUBLISHED: 2018-12-14
Improper file permissions in the installer for Intel VTune Amplifier 2018 Update 3 and before may allow unprivileged user to potentially gain privileged access via local access.
CVE-2018-18096
PUBLISHED: 2018-12-14
Improper memory handling in Intel QuickAssist Technology for Linux (all versions) may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable a denial of service via local access.
CVE-2018-18097
PUBLISHED: 2018-12-14
Improper directory permissions in Intel Solid State Drive Toolbox before 3.5.7 may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.
CVE-2018-3704
PUBLISHED: 2018-12-14
Improper directory permissions in the installer for the Intel Parallel Studio before 2019 Gold may allow authenticated users to potentially enable an escalation of privilege via local access.