Transcripts For CSPAN2 Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20140604

Detainies from Guantanamo Bay for one soldier being held. Senator mccain expressed disagreement today. Disagreement and this puts future men and women in the military at great risk. These individuals were judged in Guantanamo Bay frequently that if they were released it would cause a great risk to the men and women serving on the battlefield. These individuals, as senator graham calls them the five fab, these individuals will be able to move around qutar and after one year they will be able to go back to afghanistan. 30 of those who left Guantanamo Bay have reentered the fight. These are wanted war criminals. One of them is supposedly guilty of murdering thousands of muslims. So this decision to bring sar sergeant home is illfounded, it is a mistake ilfounded and it is putting the lives of American Service men and women at risk and that is unacceptable to the American People to me. These were taliban leaders . They were members of al qaeda, too. They are listed as taliban leaders. They were associated with and part of taliban. In 2001 al qaeda and the taliban were working together. These individuals were working with al qaeda. But some suggests the only bases with the United States is they were held in Guantanamo Bay. These people dedicated their lives to destroying us. Why do you think the judgment was made they will be a great risk. They are taliban and al qaeda. You might remember in 2001 al qaeda found a haven with the taliban and that is why he invaded afghanistan. Separating them from al qaeda is damn foolishness. I understand your problem with giving up the five taliban cabinet members clearly. I cannot get my head applauding he is home. Should he by encapsulated still . I would make every effort to bring home but i dont think the deal should have gone. You can watch the rest of the interview on our interview on our website. Today mike vickers talked about challenges that face the country. He spoke at the center for strategic and international studies. This is an hour. Good morning, everybody. We are delighted to have you here on this beautiful morning that we deserve after this tough winter. Welcome to all of of you and may special thanks to my friends at rollsroyce who make it possible to make this available. And we are delighted to have mike vickers with us this morning. I was serving in the Armed Service committee, i cannot remember the year, i think it was 1988 when we created the program 11 and the whole special operations command. And i think that we actually had mike in mind for who would be the leader at socom. It took a while for us to find him. At the time, mike was serving in the cia and he had a long history in special forces and came to the administration to become the assistant secretary back in 2007. It was just the right time when he was brought in. The Bush Administration asked him to come in and give direction. He did a great job and bob gates felt no one would be better to replace jim clapper to be the secretary for intelligence. I think it has been masterful service. We have been lucky to have you at this crucial time. I know it has been challenging and wearing but you have shouldered it so well and the community is so grateful for what you have done. We will have an interesting section this morning and kathleen is leading the q a period. Would you with your applause would you with your applause welcome secretary of of intelligence. Thank you for that gracious introduction dr. Hamre. And thank you dr. Hicks for your service for our country and to csis for putting on important forums such as this. I thought i would make a few remarks this morning for about 20 minutes and then take questions as the standard f format. Next slide, please. Appaollgies we are having technical issues. Which one hits it . All right. Which one . Good. I am qualified on this now. I am going to talk about these four topics and given that this is a military strategy forum, i am going to try to move beyond my intelligence brief and talk about the implications of Defense Strategy and National Strategy as we look at the issues. Before i do, one of the themes i would like leave you with is the change taken place in our intelligence capabilities over the decade and greater change we forsee looking forward. One of the aspects of this, is the revolutionary impact Precision Targeting has had across the enterprise whatever department it is in. To illustrate this, i would like to if you endulge me i would tell a joke my former boss used to tell about the way we did business. Many years ago, an Intelligence Officer was working in a foreign capital at a diplomatic Cocktail Party patrolling the circuit and look for targets. This officer had too much to drink and his targets went toward more amorous pursuits rather than traditional targets. And he spotted a vision of lovliness in a red gown. He approached the target and made a pitch asking the target for a dance and then to his shock the target rebuffed him and said i am rebuffing you for three reasons. First, you are drunk. Second, this isnt a waltz it is the peru anthem and third, i am not a woman in a dress i am the cardinal next slide, please. I will go three a range of terrorism challenges. The first one is quite threats. The keypoint here is we have had success in degrading the al qaeda core in the pakistanafghanistan border region they continue to pose a threat particularly a reconstruction threat. But al qaeda in yemen and the growing al qaeda threat in syria are the biggest concerns. And they are taking advantage of the metastasizing across the middle east and north africa and that is conditions that are created by ungoverned space and the historic transformation that is underway in that region. There is the threat of homegrown violent extremist as we saw with the boston bombers and others. This is job one for the Intelligence Community and our special Operations Forces as well. The Syrian Civil War presents a particularly vexing National Security challenge. It is horrific civil war with 150,000 dead. It is hcrisis with 9 million internally displaced or refugees who have fled the country. About 2 3 and 1 3rd and a continuing crisis there. And it is giving rise to a significant terrorism threat there as well. As the president noted at west point, we are committed to them and help them fight for the right of all Syrian People to determine their own future and deny terrorist a safehaven they are enjoying there in syria. And we will work with the congress to ramp up the support of opposition. Now we come to russia and relaunching. The most concerning currently is the destabilization going on in Eastern Ukraine and what we would term as Unconventional Warfare. Russian troops pulled back from the border region. They have not seized their support for prorussian sepretist and that remains to the area and threatens the integrity. Cyber threats. These plan from property theft to disruptive denial of Service Attack to destruction attacks through malware that is an emerging domain that has move quickly. We have had disinstru instructor i proliferation and use of wnds is the next issue for us. We continue to have concerns about the iranian and north korea missile programs. Iran has made progress in the ability to enrich and stock pile urrani urranium, and it is working on missile programs. North korea is expanding its facilities for uranium, and continues to develop other items that have been displayed publically a few times. I already eluded to this about the voltility in Southeast Asia and africa that will be with us for a long time to come. This is one of the key enduring challenges i think we face along with a couple others on this slide or on this slide and the previous one. All right. Transition in afghanistan. The president announced right before the west point speech that we will maintain 9800 troops in afghanistan and by the end of calendar 2015 we will reduce that in half approximately and consolidate the force on kabul and 2016 reduce it to a normal embassybase presence centered on kabul. Afghan forces assumed the lead for combat operations last year and at the end this year combat operations will seize. We will continue to train, advise and assist Afghanistan Forces and pursue the antiCounter Terrorism in the region. The rise of china. China of late has engaged in provocative behavior in mari ska skare maritime disputes and attempted to counter u. S. Engagement in asia by asserting that the United States is a declining power which we are not and we will remain a pacific power. The key thing i would like you to take away from the previous two slides is that when you look at these in total, a number of senior Intelligence Officers, director clapper, my good friend cia Deputy Director michael m morel and others havent seen these kinds of challenge on our plate in our careers. We maybe wrong about that but that is our collective judgment. Second point is that taken together these are highly asymmetric challenges. They are not directly head on head. Some are further and unconventional or novel as in the cyber case or direct in terms of challenges happening in the region or the relationship between economic power and National Security power. The other point that i want to highlight is that unlike the cold war where we had one enduring and not to be discounted National Security challenge and then a series of crisis, a number of these are likely to be more persistent and enduring and that creates challenges for strategy as you deal with enduring very difficult to solve, multiple problems. Some of you may remember in the late 1970s in the department of defense we developed in response to the situation in Central Europe an offset strategy to counter soviet military power and followed that up through the 1980s with a series of other stratgies to reinforce that and bring an end to the the cold war. We dont need just one offset strategy but a series to deal with these challenges. And the final point is also critical to dealing with the set of enduring challenges is the continuing technical safety of the United States which is a National Security imperative. Now i would like to talk about the relationship between intelligence and National Security. We say it is the first line of defense. This time Going Forward we really, really do mean it. The benefits that it gives us is it informs our National Security policy. If you are the president trying to make sense of the challenges intelligence is the first thing you need. And for our operators, war fighters and other operators, intelligence drives this. When directed by the president , the Intelligence Committee gives additional operations with diplomacy and military force. These are important as well. And offense course preventing stretegic surprise. This is an advantage to us that is important but it has to be used aggressively and prudently to make sure we are helping our leaders solve problems and not adding to their problems. And of course as you conduct operations there is inherent risk in them and the riskgain is something that we look at all of the time and continue to evolve. Now i would like to talk about investment we are making here with capabilities. I have grouped it into five areas focusing on National Intelligence on the defense strategic guidance and then the defense review and the soon to be released National Intelligence strategy. I group it into global coverage, the ability to operate in antiaccess areas, denial environments, sustaining capabilities in Counter Terrorism operations and adding to them in proliferation, building out our cyber abilities and strengthening our abilities in counter intelligence. Let me touch on these. Global intelligence covers everything we do across the areas. As budget flattens declines it becomes more important given the Global Distribution and challenges we face. I cannot say too much about the spi specifics in many of the areas. As director clapper said and betty sap mentioned in florida there are big changes ahead in the way we use our overhead space architecture. Some of the biggest changes in my view we have seen in several decades. It will be possible as director clapper mentioned through techniques such as activitybased intelligence and associated architecture capabilities to have persistance and look at things for a long time. The second aspect i believe is revolutionary is innovation. Rather than having overhead architecture as betty sap described it that is a set of supporting systems we will have integrative architecture and there is benefits that come from that. We are working to strengthen our cryptanalytical capabilities and our National Level defense human capabilities through an initiative called the defense clan service. In the antienvironment th an viral environment this is to keep pace with asia and highend challenges we are working on surveillance and reconnaissance and the resillancy of the architecture and that is all i can say. There the third bullet is indicative and we are focused on adapting the techniques we learned in Counter Terrorism where we have gotten precise and apply that to the higher end value. The creditor and reaper, the aircraft that is unmanned and known as drones, have been the signature weapon of the past decade much as the explosive device has been the weapon for terrorist. It has enabled the most precise campaign in the history of warfare and it is or most effective instrument. We are healthy in this area but we are looking to make enhancements in advance censors and extended the range of the Second Generation platform considerably. Another key advantage the the operations in the area. And the c2 problem evolves and shifts on us and we are at a turning point not just in National Security but in the Counter Terrorism and the need to rebalance and rethink the weee have done business and what adaptable and what isnt and what do we need to reinvent. On Cyber Capabilities we are supporting combat and defend the United States if called upon and the associates support structures to go with it, intelligence capabilities as you would in know demesne domain cyber space or other. Our partnerships with industry play a big role in all of this. Also with the fbi. But in particularly industry and information sharing. And counter special and security. As a result of wikileaks, snowden, and the navy yard attacks and the reviews associated with those we have taken significant measures to stregthen our capabilities against Insider Threats whether that is work place violence or work espionage. We are looking to shift the way we evaluate people for positions of responsibility and security clearances through a method called continuous evaluation. If you think of snapshots in time where you do an investigation and wait several years and do it again this is more of a continuous stream like you do with credit checks and we believe it will have a number of advantages. Okay. Let me conclude by talking about the importance of intelligence integration. This was the focus of the 9 11 commission and there are four areas i would like to talk about. Some of this honestly predated 9 11 and it has been at work or in the process of a couple decades of work and others have accelerated since responding to evolving threats. The first is integration within agencies. The cia in the 1980s isnt the cia today. It is vastly more integrated and it produces big dividands by doing so. Our intelligence agencies work much closer together. It is hard to find a case where a single Intelligence Agency has been responsible were a significant breakthrough or operation. The bin laden case is an example for many groups worked together to produce the intelligence case and that is the model Going Forward. Director clapper and i have made it a top proiority to make sure the National Defense programs are innovative and transparent to each other. We defend on each others capabilities to do missions. Tactical missions and Important Mission and Tactical Operations defend on the national capabilities. And then finally the partnership between the department of defense and the central Intelligence Agency is very important across the board in a number of intelligence areas and with capabilitiecapabilities. I would conclude with that and i am happy to take your questions with dr. Hicks. [ applause ] thank you, very much secretary vickers for your remarks. I am kathleen hicks. You covered the water front and it gives us a rich conversation opportunity with the audience and i will turn it over to them in a few minutes. But there are a few things i thought i would start with. You raise one on the last side on immigration and ending on the dod piece. We have come in the time you have been in your positions within the department of defense from 2007now from the world of trying to transition from need to know, to need to share, to i hope a culture of need to share that was the intent. But now we have had a series of incidents that test that snowden being the most recent. I am wondering if you can give a sense of where the community is on this issue of how much to share, how to control, have we swung too far or do we need to accept there is a risk that comes with the need to share culture. Thanks. Well, we continue to have a strong need to share intelligence. Our National Security strategy depends on enabling partners and that requires intelligence sharing and to make the National Security apparatus effective across the agency, domestic and foreign, also requires a high degree of intelligence sharing while also protecting need to know. In that vein we are modernizing our Information Technologies or Information Technology systems, excuse me, across the ic and department of defense to try to strike a reasonable balance there between the need to protect information and dib tribute it. In the ic it is called eye sight which is ic ite which is intelligence Information Technology enterprise and we are moving toward a system called the joint information environment and they are cloudbased and they will give us security advantages along with other technologies. So in a way it is the right balance to be struck. But you know, there are some things like bin laden had to be comparted intensely as you know. Others less so. We cannot move back from the information sharing environment. We just have to do it more responsible. You ended on the dod nexus and the president in his west point speech last week reiterated his call to transition more operations, more empicize from cia to dod on the Counter Terrorism direct action and i am wondering if you can talk about how that transition is going and what the challenges are facing the department of defense as it takes on the direct Action Missions that have in some cases been taken on by the cia. I dont want to go into too much detail. Let me make a couple points. Our assistant to terrorism for the president will be making a speech in the future as an update on what has progressed since the president s speech at the National Defense University Last may and i dont want to steal her thunder so i will leave that to her. But also, suffice to say that we have been working since last may and actually before to implement the president s guidance. Dod does percision Counter Terrorism operations and makes sure we have integrated it to meet the president s needs. Let me stick with isr being not even unmanned by in general. You made an important case for why intelligence is important in this environment that is unpredictable in threats and we can talk about ukraine and others but the pressure on isr in that kind of environment is intense and you alluded to the fact the of the flat budge and that is not conducive to increased investment in many areas. How well do you think isr fairs in the budget . And are there areas of concern in terms of how we make sure the entire enterprise is resourced . Sure. As secretary hagel made it clear, areas of key focus for him is intelligence and surveillance reconnaissance, cyber and special Operations Forces so we have the priority we believe it requires. That said, as you know, we have to be very focused on our investments and what we prioritize. And so in isr or in other capability areas undersea warfare, long range bombs, we are focusing on parts that are important to the asia rebalance as well as the continuing capabilities we will need for the Counter Terrorism problem and the instability across the greater middle east and then the cyber challenges. So that is why i have grouped the capability areas we have. One of the challenges that we face in isr, and across the department i would say, is that now more than ever you have to have an intelligence portfolio approach to investment. You may recall with the challenges in the 1990s one could think about a joint force that had capabilities that could stretch right or left if necessary, and thanks to your leadership we have sense abandoned that notion and adopt across the spectrum of challenges we have had a series of target investments in each area with a high end and low end and see what meets in the middle and that seems to be the best way to meet the National Security challenges. But with flat and declining budget it remains a challenge. Let me press you harder. Are there areas on the intelligence side that are particularly worrisome to you. You know, growing the human in the right language skill set and focus given the defusion of the threat, are there areas that you can point to that something we should be thinking about as a country as we move further into the 21st century on the intelligence side . Sure. Some of these investments depend on either technilogical advances or making sure resources are provided for the capabilities. For others, such as strengthening our human capabilities it is more about capital. It isnt about language, posture and innovation and other things that take time to transform a force, but it is more in the softer side of business, but no less hard because you are changing institutions from one to another. And then in cyber, very evolving field but they defend on other capabilities and publicprivate partnerships. There is a dependency in each case that is different and those are what i wrestle to the ground with general clapper. Let me ask one more question and i will turn it over to the audience. I know we have a lot of folks ready to test your knowledge across what the department is doing. Let me ask you an obvious question about ukraine which is how well prepared do you think the Intelligence Community was to see russian intent in terms of the annexation of crimea in particular and are we now refocusing energy as a result of that action and subsaharother russia . I guess i would answer that russia is a complex intelligence challenge. It is something we have been working since the end of the cold war in the intervening decades on. But it has been triggered really by there has been spikes because of buildups to crisis or actually crisis. For example, the innovation of georgia in 2008 and then most recently ukraine. The invasion of crimea was done suddenly and the Intelligence Community did a pretty good job of providing overall warning to the magnitude of the problem, but there is things we could always do better in certain areas. And then we are very good at once confronted a crisis and responding to it and Getting Better and better. We have continued to improve as the crisis shifted to, you know, what i describe as Unconventional Warfare in eastern craukraine. And the next part of the challenge that you eluded to is the longer term challenge posed boy this significant change in russian behavior and how we adapt the community to it. So we are it is a work in progress but it is definitely on leaders radar screen. I have left large swaths of the world uncovered. I am sure we will have questions on that. When you ask state your name and affiliation. Thank you for being here. I am christine from averson and just returned from egypt. Having being on the ground, from a dia defense standpoint how are you evolving policy for intelligence sharing with Key International partners especially those with challenging transitions on their hands . Well, our intelligence sharing is usually done almost always on a bilateral bases and it is taylored to the specific requirements of that partner tailored texas and we do it our individual agencies may have relationships with counterparts in a given country but we do it on an integrated approach, what we call the director of National Intelligence representative. So we funnel both our military intelligence as well as the various forms by our National Agencies through this one to an International Partner and that applies in egypts case and others. We have one right here. Thank you. Mccain institute. I am from georgia. You mention the challenges of russia and i like this because it describes the movement in russia. But russia is much wider than what is linked to the ukraine. My question is what does this say of the geo graphical help and what areas do you want to see helped in the crisis . That is why i had that broader challenge of revonge rather than specifically the russia russianukraine challenge. I think there are a number of challenges. As we saw with georgia and ukraine most recently and on the border there is a power challenge in what russia calls its near abroad and former soviet union. But then there is also a panel plea of other influence means and unconventional threats that range from energy cohersion to cyber to Unconventional Warfare as we see. And those threats may be the greater longer term challenge because they are asymmetric and not traditional military power. Our strategy with our allies and partners need to take account as well. But that is how i see the longer term challenge. I have one right there. The gentlemen right there. Thank you. Princeton university. I am a little puzzled by the administration attempt for the rule in terms of espionage saying espionage conducted on that stateled espionage on corporate entities done to advance others of one country is unfair. I find this puzzling because few other countries recognize this rule. It would be hard to enforce because if you know a country is condu conducting espionage you have no interest in revealing you know those things. Can you delay the concerns and tell us what the rational is behind this and the attempt to set new rules and whether or not you think it has a reasonable chance of being successful. Thank you. The president was clear with the president ial policy directive 28 on the architecture that the United States does not and will not engage in economic espionage and to benefit American Companies and International Competition. As you noted, that practice is not universally followed by other countries in the world. I would defer to my economic colleagues on this, but we think that a global system that will produce economic prospaerity fo all would be most conducive to having open, International Competition without states stealing private secrets and handing them off to there their own national companies. If you follow that logic companies bear additional cost that they would have to do to protect their systems that i think are not economically productive. I am drawing on my economics training in grad school but i dont think that is the kind of International System we or International Countries should favor. And i think that is true across the board. I dont think it is new. But it is definitive on our policy. Eric smit with the new york times. Twopart question on syria. If you could explain the options the pentagon is considering for dod to assist in arming the rebels and what operational and other challenges that imposes. And the second question is along the boarder of syria and iraq it is disappearing. Can you assess the threat for the there and how they have dealt with the threat given the support from the United States . Thanks, eric. First on expanded assistance to the syrian operation, i dont want to go further than the president did in his west point speech. We are developing options and consulting with congress on this and that is as far as i can go right now. On the threat posed by ice as you called it or as we call it the Islamic State of iraq it is a challenge both in syria and western iraq. Which is why we look at this as an increasing regional problems. This is the remnants of al qaeda in iraq that most of the leadership went to syria after being significantly degraded in iraq. And they have ambitions to pose threats broader in the region and outside the region. So it is munevolent terrorist group and one that we are increasingly focused on. They brook away from al qaeda as you know recently. I guess al qaeda was too nice for them. And then as far as your question on iraq, through our officer of Security Cooperation we continue to provide assistance to the iraqis and across the United States government to meet the challenges in iraq. Iraq is you know the conditions that give rise to the challenge there have a lot to do with political challenges they have with significant terrorist threat. So there has to be political, economic and Counter Terrorism solutions. Tay made gains from beating back some and containing the spread elsewhere but if is significant challenge to the government. The question is you mentioned in the context of cyber and working with the industry as a partner but industry works with other areas in the Intelligence Community as well. How is the Department Working with industry going to change Going Forward, either in subtle or important ways . Well, i think it is an imperative that, you know, being very honest, the current environment and development havent helped that partnership. There is some important legislation moving through the hill right now to try to set the conditions for that that we support. And it is just something, you know, as a country we will have to solve because the threat isnt going away. How about right here. Sir, george nickelson. Ct and special operations. Kathle kathleen, you eluded to the relationship between the cia and john brennan got up and said there is not a better relationship in the history but how much is driven by your background . A few years ago a former dia actived about relooking at title 10 and 53 authorities and do we look to need to codify the relationships under Something Like a title 60. You know, so the fact that a number of us have worked together for a lot of years clearly helps but i forgot who the french politician said graveyards are filled with indispensable men and i think we have put enough in place it will survive the current leadership. It is good way to do business and the challenges we face dictate it. We have evolved a lot since 2009 and the beginning of the administration and the title 10, title 50, title 60 debate. We are very, very integrated and go back and forth easily and that part of the system is working well. Right back here. Peter humpry. Intel analyst. Are you happy with the level of our dependence on Foreign Intelligence Services . Or maybe possibly should we be moving a fraction of the budget to get our own independent capabilities or are we going the other way just to save money . We have plenty of independent capabilities. And you know, periodically in some country or crisis you can find you are too dependented on foreign liason reporting but we have learned from those experiences in the past. We leverage and depend on an International Network of partners but we have robust unilateral capabilities as well and one can always adjust the system but globalally i think it serves us well. How about here in front. Steve winters washington based researcher. I think many computer experts feel that in an attack on a network the advantages is with the attacker and the defenders are in the weaker position. It was suggested yesterday in the case of, say, attacks for espionage purposes on u. S. Networks that there be a type of response to the attacker besides trying to beef up the defenses. So if these experts are right what is your advice to the administration when you have to tell them we cannot stop the attacks because the attacker has the advantage. What is your suggestion . Like a code of conduct for other countries . What advice are you giving . I will keep the advice private but i will try to answer. I am not sure i agree that the offense has the enduring advantage in the cyber field. Cyber security has evolved and it is growing. There a lot of soft targets, though. So if you are looking to steal something among many things or attack many things that is a hard defensive program. And in response to cyber policy and Economic Strategy it isnt sound economics to invest so much in defenses. And then in dermads terms of the appropriate response, even if offense is harder it will still be feasible and there is relatively softer targets to harded ta harded harder targets. So you can have code of conduct and what is in peoples interest is carry out this conflict. This is a new and evolving domaine so it is still in talk. Law enforcement, blocking n an attack. So in cyber, like anything else, you need to deploy the full range of instruments and it is an evolving field. Last question right up front. My question is what is your solution about the Cyber Security issues between u. S. And china . And what is your response about the new chinese report released on my 26 accusing the United States of hacking china and hacking of Companies Like microsoft and google. Thank you so much. Can you repeat the last part . There is new report from china accusing u. S. Of hacking activities with microsoft and Companies Like google. So i am not aware of a report about microsoft and okay. You have been generous with your time. We put you through the ringer. We appreciate your willingness to come down and talk to us. Please join me and thank you. [ applause ]. On a lonely, windswept point on the northern shore of france the air is soft all but 40 years ago at this moment the air was dense with smoke and the cries of men by and the air was filled with the crack of rifle fire and the world cant. At dawn on the morning of the sixth of june 19442205 rangers jumped off the British Landing craft and rant to the bottom of these cliffs. Their mission was one of the most of the bill and daring of the invasion, to climb these scheer and desolate. The intake of the enemy guns. The allies had been told that some of the mightiest of these guns are here, and they would be trained on the beaches to stop the allied advance. The rangers looked up and saw the enemy soldiers at the edge of the cliffs shooting down at them with machine guns. The american rangers began to climb. This week in American History tv will mark the seventh anniversary of the dday invasion of normandy starting saturday morning at 1030 eastern watch this years commemoration of from the world war ii memorial in washington. Followed at 1130 by author and historian greg simon who will discuss his new book, neptune the allied invasion of europe and the dday landing. At 1230 he will take questions and comments live. At 130, a look back at president ial speeches commemorating the day, all on American History tv saturday. At a daylong conference on Cyber Security National Security Agency Director mike rogers, to a dog and were snowdons interview with nbc news last week. His remarks came during an interview with Bloomberg Television which covered the work of nsa efforts to prevent terrorism and computer crimes. This is just under an hour. [applause] thank you. Thank you for that introduction. Sixty days you have been on the job. Courageous enough to sit down here with me today. I know everyone is excited and interested to hear what you have to say. You are taking over the agency at a very critical time for this country, a very critical time for Corporate America as we see, of course, the revelations of Edward Snoden and an increasing number of Cyber Attacks happening to u. S. Companies. I will start just by asking you, how do you think business and the nsa can best Work Together to try and solve some of these Cyber Threats that exist right now. Yes. Well, first, let me start off by saying, thank you who are taking the time from your busy days for a discussion about what i think is an important topic for us as a nation. This idea of Cyber Security. And thank you for your willingness to do that and engage in dialogue. I apologize that i was a couple of minutes late. Unfortunately it took like an hourandahalf to drive down. And i live in the district of normally we manage to do it in 25 minutes. I apologize to keep you waiting. The first point i would make is, i am with you today really into hats that i wear both as the commander of United States ever command as well as the director of the National Security agency. In terms of my business colleagues, the things i tried to highlight our first and foremost, Cyber Security is something that is found increasingly in the world real living in to your ability to execute your business and your mission, whenever that is. Your failure to do so successfully has the potential to directly impact your ability decks the emission, your corporations reputation. We are seeing that play out over the last several months in a very visible ways. I try to tell business seniors just as i try to tell military seniors, you must on this problem. You cannot simply say partier chief technical or informations side, hey, this is your problem. Go deal with it. It is of something that is worthy of my time. I have this same dialogue with senior operational commanders in the apartment where i try and make the point that this is just not your itn your computer people. You have to on this problem as a leader. You have to drive the change that inculcates this. We have to consider this every bit as foundational as we do our ability to maneuver forces as we care about logistics in our infrastructure. When i look at the problems that i am struck by a couple of things. I also tried to highlight what my business counterparts traditionally in my experience and you can take that for what its worth, traditionally in my experience we have largely been focused on the attempt to prevent intrusion. I have increasingly come to the opinion, as i have done cyber for about the last decade or so often on, i am increasingly coming to the opinion that we must increasingly spend more time focused on detection as. I wish that we live in a world where we could guarantee no one is going to access or gain entrance into our systems. That is becoming increasingly difficult, so i urge just as we have done within the departments to are we need to spend time asking yourself, what do i need to do to maximize my Detection Capabilities and find out very early of someone is there. There are a couple of issues. Clearly there is a corporate fiduciary responsibility to ensure the wellbeing of your corporation and its ability executes mission. Clearly i think when you find something that is beyond the scale of your ability as an entity to deal with, there are mechanisms for you to reach out and say, hey, this is an area i need help. From my government and perspective clearly there are areas of Critical Infrastructure where, as a nation, we have a vested interest in ensuring uninterrupted operations whether that might be in the financial sector, power sector, fuel, transportation, air travel. I mean, there are clearly sectors here that are increasing importance to our ability as a nation to function effectively, which is one of the rules the United States Cyber Command even as u. S. Cyber command is test operation defend the networks within the apartment of defense, i have also been tasked with, when directed by that president or secretary of defense to provide the capability to support civilian teammates in trying to deal with any of these challenges, particularly those working in critical of the structure. To do that we have to part closely as, have primary partners in the government, the department of Homeland Security in the federal bureau of investigation as well as those key corporate entities to potentially are receiving some of these attempts debt entered into the system or a matter ability to operate. The threat that might be coming from a foreign entity, do i deal with that on my own part of the nsa, Homeland Security, first, the part of Homeland Security is within the federal government for dealing with the security of networks outside. Now, what i would urge any corporation to do, would urge you to reach out to the department of Common Security and sure youre seeing. At the moment on the help, in fact right now in congress we are debating if there is legislation we could enact that would provide a means for corporations to do that. That is in the process right now. I am on record in my confirmation hearings to onehalf months ago. I was asked and said covina believe legislation is necessary. We have tried to do this on a voluntary basis over the last few years. A lot of that had generated increased cooperation. And i looked at the number of incidents that are voluntarily reported, the number of incidents that i believe are truly happening out there. A boy, there is a big difference i am a proponent of legislation which would set up a structure for the corporate world to share information and for us on the government side to share information with our corporate teenagers. Because coming together as a partnership is where we can be very powerful. As commanding Cyber Command, director of the National Security agency, i would not have knowledge of the Corporate Networks from unauthorized been my time, now where i have focused on the novel. My rule i am trying to figure out what is going on in the cyber arena, what is coming at us as a nation. Also brings great knowledge where we are tasked with in the government to help develop capabilities to networks, there capabilities, cryptographic standards within the u. S. Government as well as provide capability when directed to support others in identifying our and other challenges associated with the networks. We bring an amazing technical capability. Cyber command brings a very operational capability, teams organized and equipped, and trained to operate in this space identify problems on the defensive side as well as potentially an offense to offensive piece is restricted to do so. Bring all that together with partners that the fbi and the department of Common Security, and the capabilities that many corporate entities have to my spend some of my time in this job getting to know corporate counterparts in many instances and an incredibly impressed by the level of effort i see, the capability those organizations have and by their willingness to work with others. I sure would like to see us expand that to a much more a much broader segment. Well, the technology is pretty incredible, and you just alluded to the spirit let me ask you about new reports. The nsa is using facial Recognition Technology to monitor people. How does a program like that work . Well, i walked into the specifics in an open forum, but to be honest with you, that is my greatest challenge. In order to execute our mission i after be very mindful of my ability in large open forum to talk about the specifics of what we do. In my confirmation hearing i was very overly explicit about, i believe that as a director of nsa i need to be more transparent. But i cant get into the specifics as to how we do it. I need to be willing to talk in broad terms about what we do and why we do it in no way that perhaps traditionally we were not as comfortable. Can you tell me than what the goals of been like that is . We used a racial facial recognition as a tool to help us understand these foreign intelligence targets we work, counterterrorism and other big areas. Probably has more impact for us in the counterterrorism marine and than anywhere else. Where we see entities through our signals intelligence capabilities and will know then digitally, if you will. We want to the try to understand the more broadly to help enable a more broader efforts to bring them to justice and to forestall their ability to conduct attacks against attacks against ourselves and allies in the world around us. And do not, if i could, we do not do this and some unilateral basis against u. S. Citizens. We do not access at 1. I saw someone say, well, they must be accessing the department of motor vehicle. We dont. Im like, no, we dont do that. We have very specific restrictions when it comes to u. S. Persons. We have to operate under a legal framework. But you dont have access to drivers license, passport photos. You would think that the nsa would have access to some of those things. Were talking about for u. S. Persons, we dont do this for u. S. Persons. Again, why . Our mission is explicit. Foreign intelligence and information assurance. Foreign intelligence, we have to do anything involving a u. S. Person we have specific legal constraints. We are not compliant. We just dont unilaterally decide to mike, today i am going to go after citizen x, y, or c. We dont do that. We cant legally do that. But there are people that you want there are. Let me finish. Clearly in the digital age we will encounter american persons in the wilderness out there, soda speak, and we have specific restrictions about what happens once we do encounter u. S. Persons in broad terms, we have to stop all were doing. If we come to a realization that somewhere among trend tracking has a u. S. Connection we were unaware of, in broad terms we have to stop were doing. We have to assess the situation, and if we think there is a legal basis to this than we have to get Legal Authority or justification to get an. It was interesting to me, you know, we have all heard this into changed with our gentleman and moscow over the last few days. The the part i thought was interesting was he was talking about our restart and told them. The one thing weve been able to find, references to annual training, and what that annual training was about the we make every employee go through . Security of u. S. Person information. That was the training that he was going through. Generated a question in his mind from my perspective thats a good thing. Thats all the work force, you need to ask if there are things you are uncertain about. That is why we have feedback. That is where we have those collaboration mechanisms. It is important that each of us, you know, meet our expectations. And requirements and duties, is the only way this will work. Let me ask you about someone whos and no threat. For a sample, as it relates to intelligence gathering we are now sending five members of the taliban back. Can the nsa tract in there . Us of something am going to get into. No, im not asking you im going to be a very direct person. Thats good, and we appreciate the directness. I just wonder, can the nsa at least i mean, these are foreigners. There are no threat. Can we track them overseas . Do we have the means to attract individuals of foreign intelligence dimensions, yes. Am i going to sit here and guarantee that we can track every individual . No. The i will not respond about that. Again, oftentimes part of the dialogue i have heard, i think, well, i wish we have the breadth of capabilities at times i here. You really believe that . That is just not the case. Like as said, we operate under the rule block. The new director had been in place 60 days, as you are in the introduction. I tell the work force is, we have an Important Mission. Matters to the nation and our allies. What also matters is that we do it right and we do it directly. The nation has entrusted us with a great responsibility. We are not going to let them down by abusing that trust or abusing those resources. Now, a broad dialogue about what were doing and why is a good thing for us as a nation. I do not question not for one minute. As much as see it i am proud of being a flag officer of the United States navy, i am a citizen for this mission before i ever started this journey. When its over, i just want to go back to being just another citizen again. I have no intention of compromising myself or what i believe in in the execution of my duties. We are just out what to do that. You mentioned what car has been done . I have been on record. I am watching for nations, groups, individual discloses and saying we need to change the way we operate. The americans have insight here. We need to do something differently. You think the potential threats are operating differently . I am watching those born intelligence and Counter Terrorism targets. Im not going to make a blakeman statement. I am watching the highlight the revelation, talked about the implications. That is unsettling to me as an individual charged with, helping them understand the world around it and increases the ability to forestall on the parts of brothers to do harm to up our interest in dallas. That makes the job harder. Any idea . We have a fairly good idea. I will be the first. One of the things of a charter to allow work force out there, this is not what is gone to the finest. We have an Important Mission and we have to do it right. That is a matter simi. He have a broader dialogue as a nation, and that is a good thing. We will play one part in that dialogue that will involve many people and perspectives demand that is exactly the way that it should be. But for us as an organization i need you focused on the mission and doing things right that is not a penny for. Imagine if youre in this work force, every review from the outside world today has come to the conclusion there has been no systematic violation of law or policy on the part of the National Security agency. The laws and policies that have been put in place in accordance with the government structure that we call america. Of those laws where we want to be . I think that is a fair debate. The men and women of Nationalsecurity Agency i think the greater majority of them find themselves at times very confused and perplexed. It has come to the conclusion that we have not knowingly in a broad scale attempted to circumvent laws or violate procedure. And yet i got on my family asks you pass me, hey, what are you doing with my phone . I gutted restore i go to church i watched the work force trying to deal with the fact, he looks to covered during were doing something a matters. Cordray in the weather complies with laws and policy. Why is it that all my friends and neighbors are looking at me so differently . We used to call ourselves the silent service. If you go on the National Security agency you will find a black wall on which 1703 names are carved. A week ago yesterday we added two new names of the wall. That wall is 1703 people who have given their lives as part of the nsa team in the defense of a nation. One week ago today we added chief petty officer chris and pipe, airforce Staff Sergeant Richard Dixon who died in afghanistan. On the wall we say they served in silence. That is the culture, you can argue if it is good or bad, but a culture in the organization. We do them in a way that does not compromise so we do or bring attention to ourselves. Is not about us but the mission. The one person did not as here. Did you watch the interview of Edward Snoden . No, i was traveling at the time i came on. I have seen clips of it. What was your impression of him in those clips . Did he seem practiced, coached . I thought, again, he is an intelligent individual, reticulate. He seems fairly arrogant to me. He believes clearly in what he is doing. I dont question that. I dont agree with it. I fundamentally disagree with what he did it really believe that was wrong and illegal from my perspective. He stole Sensitive Information that he had been entrusted with. He induced the trust of his workplace colleagues. Do you really believe he fundamentally believes and what he is doing . Or do you think he could have been working for someone else . Could he have . Possibly. Do i believe that is the case . Probably not. I would caution everyone. Look, we have to set up processes that will deal with this issue in the long run. As citizens we are free to express our opinion. That is a real stretch for us as a nation if everyone was unilaterally decides i write everyone else is wrong when i am going to adhere to are not adhered to. He expressed the concern that he thought Edward Snoden was at some point, a question of working for someone else. Key thing thats the theory . Clearly we will need to run aground. Be part of the dialogue. If you believe in this use the power of the law and the structures of our society to make your case. The answer is not for any one of five so unilaterally decide that i am the all milling oracle and knows everything. I am in the best position to decide what is are wrong. Be leery of a society in which everyone unilaterally can do that. We love to the constitution. That document provides a framework for us as to how were guard to organize a government as well as how we will settle this to the framework recall all i urge all of us as citizens, use that framework. Articulate that viewpoint, but do it within the framework that we all have to use. As we will function as a nation, the Chaos Associated with all this unilaterally decided what we want to do and dont want to do, what was it will obey it evade and it does away. That just comes across the nea as incredibly arrogant. Arrogance . That is just my opinion. Botox so much about the culture of the nsa. I guy like to Edward Snoden is essentially gets kicked out of their cra, reuter reports. Everyone i mean, in terms of background checks what is done, what needs to change so you dont have another Edward Snoden . Clearly we need to look at it the flip side is i dont want to go too far in the other direction. I mean, i have members of the work force saying, let me understand this. It to increase security measures. Why should i be questioned because of the actions of one individual. It is about trying to find that balance. [applause] enough. It is this curious that it seems as though one agency is not talking to the other. Learn this as a guy whos got something on his record. Dont get me wrong. Caylee we wish we had known that, but on the other hand, again, he was access to our systems. And dont get me wrong. Are you 100 percent confident . Would i ever . How would never what idiot would do Something Like that . What do we change . There are few certainties in the world. How about the Server Security . We will live on. In terms of amnesty, would you consider something in exchange for all the documents that the check. The idea is very problematic. Do you think it is out there and basically it may have been turned over . Server does not have the control. Could it be in the hands of the russians of the chinese. The aspects of that. I promise. You will talk about cyber. So this is, you know, Edward Snoden, the target attack saw in the world in need to change the passwords, we are living in an environment where Server Security is front and center on everyones mind. Yet it is not because we take a lot of things for granted. Is there a cyber 9 11 . Do we need to be incredibly vigilant when it comes to these attacks . What really worries you . I clearly hope we dont need 9 11. On 9 11 almost 3,000 u. S. And other citizens of nations died. I dont think any of us ever want to see Something Like that again. I certainly hope it does not take a traumatic event, and i am not trying to argue that it has to be loss of life, but if you look at the impact to urge us to step back. Well, perhaps we need to do things a little differently. What i am hope is clearly all of us see what is happening in the world around us. The level of sophistication, the volume and the focus of this effort is increasing across our entire society. I think our read Something Like 27 percent of america is now experiencing personal data compromise. You look at the numbers for us as individuals, we are seeing in the corporate world, will we are seeing in the u. S. Government and particularly in the have i where is u. S. Ever command, were seeing in the berman of defense, the level of effort, the complexity continues to grow this world we can see. We need to recognize it and drive ourself all we can just sit back. It reminds. The joke as you are swimming in the ocean, you just have to make sure you are tested them again next to you when it comes to that shark. That is not the attitude that i hope we have. For some it is a very Business Case analysis you know, what is the risk versus the cost . And i think for some the assessment has been perhaps im not and a market segment. I have enough ability. I can afford to continue our undoing. I can deal with the risk mitigated if we have to, but i dont want to put the time, energy, resources, the money up front, if you will give you dont get me wrong, every into the as to the side was right for them. Im not kendis it here and argue this is the right level of investment. We have tried to work with them the government and the developing standards, if you will fall apart during and try to promulgate across the federal government as well as the civil sector. These are standards that we believe we would urge you to adopt. If you do that is significantly increases our ability to forestall penetration, significantly increases your to ability to deal. So we are putting collectively of a lot of work into it, but we clearly are not where we need to be. And think about what you have in front of you. You have to stay in front of all these people are on the world that are trying to be more and more sophisticated counter you recruit . Competing with the likes of approval, if it is in tears, and then the opporunity to get stock options. What did we come to work for you . It is the same reason. The argument i have made is, look, we are never talking about nsa, and even in the military. Trying to attract the same kind of people. We are never going on the basis of money. That is the matter, we just will be the place to go. We are about serving something bigger than ourselves, and the toes of right and wrong. We are about doing a mission as important to the nation. We are about doing something thats quite frankly you cannot do legally on the outside the war really challenging and test you and give you the opportunity to use Cutting Edge Technology and apply it in a way that will help with the defense of the nation. The positive side, a problem under u. S. Cyber command in terms of attracting quality people dont get me wrong. Something happen lots of attention to i am very mindful. We have a lot of technology. Is the people. Thats where we get the true value. Its here. That dedication and willingness to work some incredibly long hours and thats where it takes. This is a culture of mission and doing the right thing for the right reasons. I am proud to be the director of nsa, the commander of u. S. Ever command. Until the work force of believe in nsa and Cyber Command. I did not have to take this job. I did it for a reason because i believe in the mission, the men and women who executed, and i thought particularly as i was joining the nsa team, hey, we are in a tough spot right now. I could walk away and to say not my problem. I dont need the arctic. I said to myself, what kind of leader would you be if you did that . Use spent your whole adult life working in this field. Bella is payback time. So thats why i stand before you. We appreciate the transparency. Let me ask you, you know, i talked to a lot of tac ceos on bloomberg tv. I have heard a lot of frustration from the Tech Community regarding all of these revelations that concern is that we are getting ourselves into a somewhat protectionist environment. Cisco for instance is a risk of losing his china contracts over cyber spying will reduce say . We are as a Global Economy despite one nation spine and another. Well, first i certainly appreciate the concern. We have a responsibility. I dont question the concern. We work our way through this. Of point i tried to make from my corporate counterparts are will we are doing is an activity that almost every significant nation state on this planet does. I dont care if its us. Every nation tries to do that for the wellbeing of its citizens. Very nations have varying degrees of credibility. We clearly have amazing capability within the construct of the u. S. Governments. Help generate insight and knowledge you have seen some of the play out. What have not played out is so if i appreciate the technology. This is not meant to be. Use this illegally against the citizens. Talk to me about the protections you have put in place to make sure your work force cannot abuse this authority. Talk to me about why you feel you need to do this why is it in our best interest . The broader discussion. Why is it an arm best interest . And matter of National Security. And because it is a matter of our security as a nation. One of the challenges of being one of the largest and most powerful nations in the world is there are a lot of people out there who dont have our best interest at heart. Groups and individuals who if say i would hate on the 110 over at the threat that in the name of this that we have to make dramatic changes if we go down that road in the and they have one. I have always believed that. A court the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. The principal military adviser. We do not want to destroy ourselves and become something we are in the name of security. In that trying to achieve that we have that that knowledge that threat exists. We have lost thousands of citizens. Individuals who have and continue to attempt to generate threats to take down our citizens, to in a very if they have their way in sometimes very spectacular ways. We have been very successful in forestalling much of it. Much of the things we have forestalled as citizens you will never ever know about or hear about. That is the nature of intelligence and business. Of the chinese dont trust American Tech Companies and American Tech Companies and trust chinese companies, are we on the verge of seeing some kind of protectionist trade war as a result . Is it possible . Yes. Long run is it likely . At dont think so. In the long run one not . Because i believe in the end competition and the quality of what we do in the value of what our corporations offer will winnow. It is not by chance that the u. S. Enjoys such a significant advantage in this market sector. It is because of what we are able to produce. I believe in the and the valuable we produce. The department of justice indicted five chinese officers and accusations of Cyber Espionage recently. To the nsa have a role in that . Yes. I walked into the specifics. Does this seem like a titfortat scenario . That is what the Business Community is worried about. No. Again, what is the framework we use to resolve issues like this . The legal framework. But just one nation talking about what your dennis and another during this. The rule of law and ultimately if it proceeds a judge and jury will make a decision. Does the where system works. With that i apologize. One final question. We have 40 seconds. This would be a good way to wrap up, admiral. [laughter] what can you tell american citizens right here today that are worried that they will never be fully anonymous or have our right for full privacy again . In the digital age of the 21st century we have to come to grips with what it means and out world today. That is a must bear question. In the world we are living in increasingly by choice and by chance we are forfeiting privacy at levels that i dont think as individuals we truly understand. It is so ingrained whether it is the cameras that are out in the street, whether it is everyone of your personal digital devices that are constantly asking you, can assure you are. Whether its, you know, the questions that we get asked in trying to do business. A, give me your Social Security number, your zip code, tommy often you shop with me. We are in the world of big data, like other not. We are in the digital age, and we increasingly, as a nation and it is not just us. We have to come to grips with what it means of the hon. We have framed this debate way to narrow from my perspective. This is much bigger the Nationalsecurity Agency. This is a much broader dialogue, and that is what john podesta has been done with the white house. Use of the remarks on the 17th of january where he said, we need to think about this more broadly. Is an important question. What are we comfortable with . But the idea you can be totally anonymous in the digital age is increasingly difficult to execute. All right. Thank you. Admiral, thank you very much. Thank you. [applause] i would like to welcome to the stage robert muller, former director of the fbi. He is currently a partner at wilmer al. And we are going to talk just exactly about what businesses can do when they recognize a cyber threat and the measures that they can put in place. Please welcome. [applause] you have had the opportunity to listen to a few panels this morning. The discussion with the admiral. What is your biggest Server Security. [laughter] you know what, just for you i will start there. [laughter] what is the Biggest Issue facing Corporate America right now when it comes to sever security . The lack of understanding of the area, the issues, and a policy or a practice generally have ceos and top management to delegate problems. And not recognizing the debt than that challenges and how swiftly a cyber attack can cut your reputation down. And not anticipating, not knowing this arena, it is difficult for them to come up with an organizational structure that will immediately elevate those facts that could be substantially damaging to the corporation. I what happened to me and the bureau, one of the mistakes i made was in upgrading our Information Technology presence. Well, i did not ask the hard questions. Youre relying on persons . On the one hand you have your technologist. You have to come up with a new Case Management system. You delegate that it really tell you its going happen. Doesnt. He looked back and reflect and say to my delegated an area where should have been personally involved going back to what admiral rogers was saying. You have to take responsibility of the top. I think too few senior management, no one understands that particular issue. Secondly, our answer as to how to address it. If you are ceo of a company, you might be a terrific manager. You might really understand sales. You might really understand your products, but you dont miss a surly understand technology. You have to understand it to the point you can know and understand where the money is going to and adopting the new technology, upgrading the technology, you just cannot leave it to others. You have to be sufficiently knowledgeable in understanding. And i found myself, you know, particular point in time you come in and switch and a new Case Management system will work. In my mind, i dont really know how thats going to work. Ultimately it did not give it to go back and restructure and get it done. We got it done, but it is one of those areas where should have taken more of my personal time. There are a lot of questions surrounding what is exactly the responsibility of fitness when it comes to protecting the cyber arena. How does that break down . A couple of things. I think on one side the federal government has to do a better job, but even a better job is sharing information between nsa, fbi and department of Homeland Security. On the other side, the Business Community needs to do a better job of coming up with a vehicle for sharing intelligence amongst themselves but also sharing intelligence with the federal government. If the legislation is contemplated up on the hill which gives a safe harbor the Companies Providing information to the federal government relating to breeches and the like that would be tremendously helpful, but there has to be an exchange of the information between the federal government on one side and the private sector on the other side. And when thats a lot of trust. It implies a lot of trust. The company has to be willing to say to my am going to turn over all of this. What is turned over . They can protect their intellectual property and still turn of the information that is necessary to determine the piece about whether was recently used. If it affected their network is it infecting others . We will say that in the wake of september 11th of the things we had to do was develop relationships with other partners in order to be successful we could not have been successful without the joint Terrorism Task force in state and local law enforcement. The cyber rig is the private sector. We are not going to be successful, and we are getting ahead of this curve without having mechanisms for the sharing of intelligence. In the private sector sharing in a months the federal agencies and having that information shared. What to the question, how that is currently working. Our private company schering . Most of it to my would say, is tremendously in formal. It has to be a more formal process of sharing in sectors and in thanks to the department of Homeland Security and in particular sectors theyre is a growing body of capability integrating the intelligence and particular sectors, particularly the financial sector, for instance. Why in particular . Because they have gone further than most others in setting up capabilities that allow the sharing of information. So, if a client comes to you and says, i think theres been a breach, what do you advise them to do, the next course of action . On the right side as what as was put post breached. One would take certain steps pre the most important thing is to is in charge. You cannot just go and say youre a cio or your chief security officer, okay, youre in charge. A substantial breach that implicates, first of all, your own people, your customers, one of the first steps you have to take is to determine what exactly was the breach, how devastating was it, how you control of which requires for and six. To often there is a delay between the breach and getting forensics on board to tell you exactly what happened. Then you can notify or dont think you can notify until you know exactly what happened. Consequently you have to address forensics, the fact at the sec is going to the one no particular breach. There are five or six or seven entities that have to be looked at in order to determine what the next steps are. You have to orchestrate bring together those particular strains of responsibility in such a way that you move quickly and have someone in charge of is not necessarily just the technician, not just a humanresources person that somebody of the ceo. What does the company need to do to inform the people have been effective. You look at the example. It does not immediately come out and tell customers. There is no law on the books the requires them to do so. The banks need to let the customers know that their credit cards may have been violated. A guidance . Corporate america in terms of communicating . One of the things, the circumstances you see is that when theyre is a substantial breach, one of the first thing that comes to my with general counsel is coming down the pike which is an aspect of it. But the litigation is not as important as the reputation of damage. Particularly. The reputation of damage can outweigh any considerations related to the inevitable litigation that will come down the pike. And so prioritizing to preserve that reputation damaged by notification but notification with a Firm Understanding of what happened is tremendously important. And then ensuring your public, your customers that it is not going to happen again takes from above and cannot be two or three levels down. So basically it sounds like overall defining a persons need to be in charge and that person in charge really having a firm grasp of the technologies base overall is critical. Yes, but you need not only again, like i tea, you need the technical aspects of it. That is part of it, but you also need the people aspects, particularly when the most serious contemplated breach would be the insider threat. Well, you bring up an important point. Corporate america deals with that, just as the nsa does. But we talked your today and you will continue to talk about protecting networks. It will be on the biggest vulnerability. A disgruntled employee who has a administrators rights to is not happy and then can do the damage from within. And so that, you have to identify quickly and address it from the Human Resources points of view. Are there mechanisms to do that . There is an extreme and the government, for instance, everyone in the fbi has to take a polygraph periodically. Held periodically . Every five years. Every five years . Every five years. Look at your financials, look at whats nsa, admiral rogers was indicating was going on. And so on one end of the spectrum you have the auditing, the downloads, the focus on individuals or financial situations, the polygraphs for nsa for the secrets that they keep. On the other end you have companies that say we trust our employees. If we instituted anything along those lines it would indicated distressed and not only would our employees beyond happy, but they would be so one happy if they will go to some other employer. Someplace in between you have to draw the line. It is a challenging balance. Let me ask you about something that the admiral and i spoke a bit about. That is the concern that we are getting ourselves into a protectionist environment as far as our Global Economy is concerned. China accusing us of spying on them. We are, of course, saying chinas by on less. Its a backandforth. And that the and the fear among many in the Tech Community is a were going to up Lean Business opporunity sphinx as a result of all this worry. How do you see that playing out . Any sort of infantile stage of cyber hyper or earnest. I do think in the short term the discloses well affect their relationship. I would say affect their relationship, i with the amount of nanotechnology is such certainly in europe and elsewhere and the west, ultimately we will prevail despite the efforts to bolster developing internal corporations to take over some of the information capability. In china, it was inevitable in any event. China wishes once our technology to the extent that they can get it and build their own, that has been there goal forever and a day. This may be a bump in the road. He thought for awhile of this will be is it naive for other countries to say you guys are looking at us. Is a night of los to say, oh, youre looking and us. Their number of countries out there, some of bin, who have their son and capabilities that and not necessarily to their population or understood it put level of who but the increasing coverage of this, the fact we are the only country that im aware of where we have a court the passes on the request to intercept an individual in the National Security round. That provides protection. In scandinavia, uk, france, elsewhere, there is not accord between the prosecutor and the investigator and the intersection that passes on the problem for that particular intersection. We look at it and see the something we would investigate and we have to send another memo back to nsa saying yes we are interested in investigating and give us information. When the cyberattacks were a substantial concern day in and day out this