President-elect Donald Trump has repeatedly questioned whether
critical computer networks can ever be protected from intruders,
alarming cybersecurity experts who say his comments could upend more
than a decade of national cybersecurity policy and put both government
and private data at risk.
Asked late Saturday about Russian
hacking allegations and his cybersecurity plans, Trump told reporters
that “no computer is safe” and that, for intelligence officials,
“hacking is a very hard thing to prove.”
“You want something to
really go without detection, write it out and have it sent by courier,”
he said as he entered a New Year’s Eve party at Mar-a-Lago, his Florida
resort.
“I think that computers have complicated lives very greatly,” Trump said earlier last week. He tweets prolifically
but says he rarely uses any other communications technology more
advanced than the telephone. “The whole age of computer has made it
where nobody knows exactly what’s going on. We have speed, we have a lot
of other things, but I’m not sure you have the kind of security that
you need.”
Since President George W. Bush moved to develop a
comprehensive national cybersecurity policy after the attacks of Sept.
11, 2001, the federal government has made a top priority of preserving
the integrity of the public- and private-sector computer networks that
enable modern commerce and society.
Trump delivered a campaign address
in October that deemed cybersecurity “a major priority for both the
government and the private sector” and said that cyberattacks from both
state and non-state actors “constitute one of our most critical national
security concerns.”
But the U.S. intelligence community’s
determination that Russia engaged in a state-sponsored hacking effort
aimed at electing Trump has prompted the president-elect to openly
question the reliability of that assessment while simultaneously taking
aim at the broader notion of cybersecurity.
Experts said Sunday
that Trump’s comments and his handling of the Russian hacking
allegations could embolden foreign hackers and undermine the U.S.
government’s ability to respond to them.
Michael Sulmeyer, a
former Defense Department policy adviser who directs the cybersecurity
project for the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, referenced one of
Trump’s earliest efforts — during a presidential debate in September —
to cast doubt on allegations of Russian interference on his behalf.
“This
is not some issue about a 400-pound hacker in a bedroom who might be
mischievous,” Sulmeyer said. “These are real threats to our country, and
the concerning part for me is to see how this issue has become
politicized and made partisan.”
Although some Republicans have
pushed for a sharper response to the Russian hacking — notably Sens.
John McCain (Ariz.) and Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) — many others have
joined Trump in playing down the intense coverage and debate.
“Russia
spying on the U.S. is not news,” said Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the
chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and a top Trump ally. “It’s
what they do. A lot is being made about something that’s already known.
To all the people acting shocked, it’s as if they’re shocked there is
gambling going on in a casino.”
Transition spokesman Sean Spicer,
slated to become White House communications director upon Trump’s
inauguration, said Sunday that intelligence officials will brief Trump
this week on the election-related hacking.
He suggested on ABC’s
“This Week” that the retaliatory sanctions President Obama imposed
against Russia last week — which included the expulsion of 35 suspected
intelligence agents — may not have been justified.
“The question
is, is that response in proportion to the actions taken?” Spicer said.
“Maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t, but you have to think about that.”
Spicer
compared the Obama administration’s sharp response to the recent
Russian hacking with its reaction to last year’s revelation that hackers
linked to the Chinese government stole the personal data of millions of
federal employees.
“Not one thing happened,” he said. “So there
is a question about whether there’s a political retribution here versus a
diplomatic response.”
Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), the top
Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, drew a sharp distinction
between the two cases and called on Trump “to stop denigrating the
intelligence community.”
“They didn’t just steal data; they
weaponized it,” he said of Russia, also on the ABC program. “They dumped
it during an election with the specific intent of influencing the
outcomes of that election and sowing discord in the United States. That
is not something China has ever done.”
Ari Schwartz, who served as
the top cybersecurity adviser on the National Security Council in 2015,
said in an interview that Spicer misjudged the Obama administration’s
response to the employee data hack. Private talks with the Chinese
government, he said, resulted in a demonstrable decline in
state-sponsored hacking.
“We came up with ways of dealing with
them and working with them,” Schwartz said. “It proves that the
sanctions work. Even the threat of the sanctions have changed Chinese
behavior.”
Trump’s recent comments, Schwartz said, point to a
possible recalibration of cybersecurity policy — one that could shift
the careful balance of innovation and security embraced by both Bush and
Obama.
“We’re not going back to the world of couriers and
letter-writing; we’re going to continue to do things online,” he said.
“There are ways to do it where you can manage risk, and that’s really
what the goal should be here — to get to the point where we can have the
efficiencies and the benefits and still be secure.”
What remains
unclear is to what degree Trump’s views on cybersecurity will remain
filtered through the prism of the Russian hacking affair.
In his
October campaign speech, he pledged to undertake a comprehensive review
of national cybersecurity systems, create law enforcement task forces to
combat cybercriminals and strengthen the military’s Cyber Command. In a
sign that he plans to follow through on those plans, last week he chose
Thomas P. Bossert, a Bush administration official who played a central
role in cybersecurity planning, as his top White House assistant for
homeland security and counterterrorism.
On the Russian hacking,
Trump said Saturday that he knows “things that other people don’t know,
and so they cannot be sure of the situation.” Asked what he was
referring to, he said, “You’ll find out on Tuesday or Wednesday” — an
apparent reference to his upcoming intelligence briefings.
As long
as Trump openly doubts the intelligence community’s ability to
accurately assign responsibility for cyberattacks, he could find it
difficult to identify, fend off and retaliate against cyberattackers. He
has publicly compared the intelligence community’s Russian hacking
assessment to its erroneous determination that Iraqi leader Saddam
Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction — a comparison
Spicer repeated Sunday.
Said Sulmeyer: “If they don’t want to make
a full-fledged apology or correction about Russian hacking, okay, but
at some point, they’re going to have to come out and explain their
understanding of the threat and what they want to do about it. If we see
that soon, I think that’s a good sign. If that slips, I think that will
be an indicator that they are not prioritizing it and they are leaving
the American people at greater risk.”
No comments:
Post a Comment