- Edwards Releases Senate Fundraising Totals
- Academics Say Higher Education Prepared Them for Higher Office
- Top Races to Watch in 2016: The Mountain Region
- Top Races to Watch in 2016: New England
- Top Races in 2016: The Midwest
Top lawmakers in Washington recently talked about reconsidering cybersecurity legislation ó legislation that has failed to become law multiple times.
While President Barack Obamaís executive order is making progress in attempts to shore up some cybersecurity weaknesses, difficult questions remain, particularly regarding personal privacy. We donít have to compromise our personal privacy for the sake of security. With a forward-thinking cybersecurity policy, we can keep ourselves safe and sustain our individual freedoms.
Information networks ó such as the Internet ó provide unprecedented opportunities for individuals all over the world to meet their potential. But that interconnectedness also creates great security vulnerabilities for the United States. Our banks, power companies and telecommunications networks are all networked and have been targeted with malicious intent.
The government, however, canít protect them alone because most of these assets are privately owned. That is one reason the director of national intelligence called cybersecurity the greatest threat to Americaís security.
For private companies, one way to reduce the threat of cyberattacks is to share information with government agencies. This enables our security and law enforcement officials to create a fuller picture of potential threats, reduce the impact of ongoing threats and possibly prevent some future attacks. Sharing information wonít create a threat-free environment, but it can create the conditions for the government to help businesses protect themselves.
Itís important to note, however, that thereís a right way to share cyber-threat information and a wrong way to share cyber-threat information.
The right way to share information is consistent with traditional American values, respects personal privacy and ensures continued freedom of speech. The wrong way is to assume that we must cede all of our personal privacy to remain safe. We can make the Internet more secure without giving up our personally identifiable information.
In fact, our security leaders say they donít need access to our personal information to protect cyberspace. They just want to know that there are attacks, and the nature of those attacks, so they can help others protect themselves. This can be done by limiting information shared to technical details ó like malicious codes and IP addresses ó as opposed to sharing emails and other personal items.
By ensuring information shared with the federal government is anonymous, we can protect ourselves at home and lead by example ó consistent with American values ó abroad.
If we concede that itís necessary to share the content of our communications to secure ourselves, other countries will follow our lead and use our example as a pretense for creating similar policies. The fallout will be detrimental. Freedom of speech will be stifled as personal communications are shared with national governments. Authoritarian countries will cite our policies as they suppress democracy movements grappling to take root.
The better path is to lead by example. We can ensure that information networks enable hope and opportunity around the world without sacrificing our security.
Some will argue that information should be shared with the government wholesale. But better securing cyberspace doesnít require knowing what we write in our emails. We can do both. We can make information anonymous before itís shared with the federal government and limit the purposes that information can be used for.