Eyes wide close - pondering another cyberattack

People fret about next year's election, about protecting 2020.  What about NOW?  If a hostile power could get into 20+ state voting sites, can basically hack at will, my worry is about it or others, foreign OR domestic, taking over nuclear power plants, about seizing our digital infrastructure which makes the real deal work.  

Where is the outcry to Congress to flood money into new cyber defenses? Where is the hot discussion about federal v. state sovereignty over cyber space, debating issues over ceding the later in order for the former to provide across-the-net protections?  Where are the calls to upgrade government systems, to bring them into the new millennium?

An atrocious job of closing the barn door, not knowing the horse has already gotten out - - in May 2016, when the stealth attack was under way, Congress in its usual great (sarcasm) wisdom passed the Modernizing Government Technology Act of 2016, which allocated $3.1 billion to fund to retire & replace "legacy" (as in "Yikes! Some date back to the '70s!!) systems.

At the time it passed, co-sponsor Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) said, "The federal government must come into the 21st century. We owe it to the people we serve. We need to streamline the management of IT assets. We need to make strategic and wise investments, and we need to have a schedule of replacement for legacy systems. We need to encrypt and protect against cyberattacks for the sake of the American people."   With a paltry $3.1 billion?  That's not a sop*, it shows their saps!

There has been a lot of criticism of President Obama for not doing more to stop last year's cyber attack on the election.  How much could he do to protect our systems when it took almost a year for the government to investigate the successful July 2015 cyber attack on the Office of Personnel Management & the subsequent allocation of a measley $3.1 billion dollars to upgrading systems.  That's like being reamed out for not thwarting an attack on your borders when they are armed to the teeth & you have a BB gun.  

Have you heard anything about Congress making this a priority?  Or the president demanding we face the threat with resolution & the will to mount the defenses we so clearly lack?  Or we the people screaming to stop fiddling with a health care bill that is a disaster & address an actual disaster before it descends into full-scale calamity?

Silence.  

It gets worse.  The person in charge of government IT infrastructure, Beth Anne Killoran, was quoted as saying,  "Just because something has a particular age, doesn't necessarily meant that is the end of life."  When it comes to IT systems?  To swipe from Speaker Boehner, "When it comes to IT systems that date back to the last millennium, it sure as H-E-double tooth picks does!"

Here's how things stood around this time last year...


Per The Hill  05/03/16:

The General Accounting Office (GAO) said the allocation should be in the $20 billion$, since most of the $61 billion already allocated for government IT systems goes to operation & maintenance, leaving wildly insufficient monies for upgrades modernization (widespread replacement).   

The DEFENSE DEPARTMENT was using a 53-year-old system backup to sen/receive emergency action messages from nuclear forces, runs on a 1970s-era computer system & uses 8-inch floppy disks. Replacement parts are hard to find because it is so massively obsolete. Our DEFENSE Department.  ~   The Pentagon was planning to wrap up replacing the entire system - by 2020.  No worries about the floppies, because (per DOD chief IT officer Terry Halvorsen), “The reliability factor on that system is where I need it to be…it is completely secure because it is a closed system.”

The master file at the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE responsible for assessing generated refunds was running on a 1950s “assembly language code.”  Again - no worries.  The good news is the computer language is tagged by the GAO as "fast"; the bad news is it typically can only run on a single computer, is difficult to maintain.  "The system, which costs $13.6 million per year to maintain, is supposed to be replaced, but there is no firm date. "

I'm just adding verbatim what The Hill writes about SOCIAL SECURITY - would send me in an emotional tailspin to use my own words:  "The Social Security Administration has rehired former employees who were some of the few that knew how to operate the complex system that determines retirement benefits and eligibility. The system is 31 years old and made up of 162 subsystems, with some running on a early 1960s-era programming language called COBOL.  ~ Much of the system was developed by the agency itself rather than contractors, and officials report that “most of the employees who developed these systems are ready to retire and the agency will lose their collective knowledge.” The agency has been modernizing the system over the years, but more than half of the budget is dedicated to maintaining it."

The STATE DEPARTMENT uses a 27-year old system to track and validate their visa info on 55,000 foreign nationals using graphic interface software no longer supported by the vendor.  It's due to start replacing the system next year, although the GAO does caution that it is replacing one system of unsupported software with another that is also not supported. 

Ah, the TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT....  Its records on shipping & maintaining hazardous materials have multiplied because the department has to teach employees how to use the archaic systems used to scan & maintain docs.  It "uses a 2002 Microsoft platform and a 1990s program to create web pages."  The hope was to retire the antiquated portions of the system by next year.

It is to weep - and tremble in our boots.

*  sop -a thing given or done as a concession of no great value to appease someone whose main concerns or demands are not being met.

TR is Fit to be Tied

They really shoulda known - as soon as Ryan Zinke showed up for his first day as Secretary of the Interior wearing a cowboy hat, riding a horse, the hunters & fishermen who believed he had their back should have gotten a sinking feel that he'd be all hat, no cattle.

He started out well, making the right moves so they could let out a sigh of relief that after eight years, someone had their backs.  But then he settled into his office.  The hat stayed as his trademark touch, but the staunch conservationist seems to have gotten lost somewhere around DuPont Circle.  Seems that the man who was touted by hunters as “someone who understands the importance of public lands” understands their value even more.  Turns out that the public lands just aren’t paying for themselves, so we gotta focus more on production than on protection & preservation.  (Those later two are soooo wimpy Obama!)

Turns out that Zinke is a BF of the fossil fuel industry.  His idea of a road trip is checking out which of 27 currently protected areas need to be recategorized in order to help the president meet his “energy dominance” goal.  Out went the moratorium on new coal leases taken on public lands – too panty waisted.  Ditto a hydraulic fracking rule designed to protect public health.  Bye by a rule limiting how my methane can be released from operations on federal land.  He’s expanded offshore fossil fuel production.  As for habitat restoration - - soooo the last administration!  And the Chesapeake & there waterways - they are all wet, so need to be less drain on public monies.

Although his hunting & fishing buddies are not thrilled with his moves, they haven’t lost hope that this Zinke is an aberration & this Teddy Roosevelt side will show itself real soon.  They keep waiting & TR keeps spinning in his grave.

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2017/jul/11/can-zinke-be-trusted-interior-steward-federal-public-lands/#/0

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2017/jul/11/can-zinke-be-trusted-interior-steward-federal-public-lands/#/0

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/06/20/zinke-defends-trumps-sharp-cuts-at-interior-this-is-what-a-balanced-budget-looks-like/?utm_term=.2051706a6876

I've Yet to Hear Most Obvious Question

Yet it begs to be asked - WHY did Rob Goldstone write the e-mail letter to DJT, jr in the first place?  

It looks like blatant entrapment, clear cut bait & switch.  Seems to me that DJT jr & Jared were played by Goldstone - with a possible assist from Manafort, because why else would a super savvy political operative with full knowledge of where the lines are that one does NOT step over not squash the situation from the get go.  

Path Not Taken

It's beyond me - why is the media, especially conservative politicos & pundits, not taking up the "he was played" defense of DJT2?  

Once Rob Goldstone had Trump the Younger on the hook, he went after bigger fish, offering to send related info to Rhona Graff, considered "Trump's right hand" by those in the know. Praise be for POTUS' sake, his son apparently declined Goldstone's request for her e-mail.  It doesn't take a super brain to see someone casting out a lure, then once one fish was hooked, casting about for bigger trophies, all of which ended up as a classic bait & switch.

If I was a conservative mediaite, I'd depict DJT2 as the victim of a seasoned operative, out to get his hooks into a kid who trusted him & only wanted to please his Dad - we can all relate to that - to earn his praise & positive attention by landing a major coup.  But how to explain Kushner approving of the meeting, attending?  And Manaforte makes NO sense at all, unless he also wanted to see fils & fils-in-law seriously compromised. 

It's a path strangely not taken.

Health Insurance Limits

When people talk about limits & health insurance, it usually refers to a particular coverage limit.  The health insurance limits I'm concerned about are those of well-intentioned people limited by their baseline ignorance of the real-world, real-time impact of being poor.  If only the poor had a K Street lobbyist with the ability to get the ear & action of politicians & policy makers, or at least each congressional office including one genuinely person on staff whose sole purpose was to chime in with reality checks!

Yeah....

It's great that the ACA offers considerably broader, more affordable premiums.  Thanks to Obamacare,  I'll be able to access & afford health care coverage for the first time in over ten years.  Just one fly in that soothing ointment - those pesky co-pays.  20% ain't chicken feed. 

My costs for blood work labs has been $1500 (without contracted health care coverage?  providers can - and do - charge whatever they wish), which means I'd face a $300 co-pay. 


Just for lab work.

Trust me - as someone who couldn't access (pesky pre-existing condition!) let alone afford coverage, availability & an affordable premium is wonderful.  If I could get "gap" coverage like John has for Medicare, it'd be workable.  But anyone in a genuine financial bind - even if just temporarily - will wince at co-pays. 

The first limitation people who hope to reform our nation's health care have to get rid of - -  the pair of blinders limiting their ability to understand that providing access & affordable premiums are just two, far from only steps.  

TV, Social Media & the Civil War

Imagining the impact of television & social media back in 1820, when Congress passed the Missouri Compromise.  The reaction of an ante-bellum Fox News handled debate on the Compromise of 1850.  Or the response of a mid-18th century MSNBC to the Fugitive Slave Act.  How might a mid-1800s CNN profiled Dred Scott & SCOTUS Chief Justice Roger B. Taney?  How long would Uncle Tom's Cabin graced the NY Times best-seller list and what would readers' comments shared on an 1850s' version of Amazon? 

WALK a MILE

“Before  you judge a person, walk a mile in her shoes,” is an old & still apt adage.  So, will try to walk a mile in Ted Cruz’ shoes. 

1949  &  1970 – to grasp a core challeng within the GOP, all you have to do is consider those two numbers:  the years John Boehner & Ted Cruz were, respectively, born.  Not just different generations, but radically different ones.   Pre-Information Age & Post.  Struggles to program a vcr & able to balance Facebook, Twitter, Instagram & whatever new app comes along.   Interprets & parses language, uses it as action.  Practiced politician, passionate ideolog. 

Ted Cruz strikes me as a man who stakes out his principled goal, with possibly no clear endgame in sight - other than never ever swerving from his course.  Where a John Boehner expects to coerce where he can't cajole, Cruz invites others to participate in a righteous fight.  BIG difference between him & his and the Old Guard.   A rigidly principled, utterly unyielding stand instead of dealing quid pro quo.   

While Ted Cruz may be perceived by politicos &  pundits as undeveloped in the ways of national governing,  it seems he views them as  hopelessly undeveloped in the ways of principled action, warped by the environment in which they work, unlike the fresh faces of himself, Mike Lee & Mike Kelly. 

Does he feel that the Old Guard’s expertise is utterly ill suited for current day politics, managed by people  inside the Beltway but outside America’s id?  He acts like a man who doesn’t see our country as lacking the time for the Boehners & McConnells to unlearn out-dated knowledge & entrenched habits and get up to speed. 

Cruz may be undeveloped, but to him that would be a key advantage, unschooled in the archaic while open to what works in the here & now.  He, perhaps more than any other Republican, has grasped that our world culture is changing, opening  unimagined opportunities for a new approach to… well – everything. 

The old standard was for newly elected members of Congress to be “backbenchers,”  learning the ropes & soaking up the ways of governing, seeing how to develop unity around their issues, how to get bills passed.  Get the tools & learn the lessons now, so they could play their proper role later. 

Many GOP senators & representatives elected since 2010 came to Washington to toss out this tried & true script.  Instead of creating performances within a given norm, they improvise  as things come along, as opportunities open up.   Established leaders  - in & out of government – seem horrified that Ted Cruz can point to no predetermined endgame, can’t express the ultimate HOW to achieve his utterly principled, won't-be--compromised goal. 

Cruz shouts from the rooftops that he was sent to the Senate in order to TOTALLY undo Obamacare,  by whatever means possible.  He’s determined to accomplish the first, will figure out the second when it comes along.  For a Ted Cruz, it’s not necessary to envision the means before setting the action in motion, just to be ready when opportunities appear - as he is sure they will – and grab them. 

He will never compromise, never bend, never waiver from his determination to obliterate the ACA, by whatever means possible. 

The Old Guard - in government, business, media - may look for a subtext to Ted Cruz' statements, for nuance or shadings to his stand, not realizing that he is a man who uses words for action, not for messaging.  To him, clear words & clear actions are one & the same.