Letter: Openness needed to evaluate cyber initiative

Regarding "Editorial: Security, not secrecy": I agree with your editorial regarding the need for more openness for the administration's cyber initiative.

Permit me to add a few more reasons for openness. To be clear, I am not suggesting the government publicize things like security plans or possible operations.

No, I am suggesting the government continually engage the public in security policy discussions so they can help counterbalance government's instincts to paint risk with too broad a brush.

Furthermore, the government is obliged to let the public know how their information is being protected, how their tax dollar is being spent, who is spending it, and let them assess whether they believe it is being spent wisely.

I also want to remind folks of the great breadth of the federal government and that for every large department like Homeland Security or Defense or Justice there are scores of smaller ones like the Marine Mammal Commission, Battle Monuments Commission or Federal Trade Commission.

And, while some of what government does must be secret, the overwhelming majority of programs even in the large departments exist to interact with the public, industry, academia, international scientists, and so on.

Simply put, and I mean no disrespect, in my lengthy government experience, the risks to and thus the actual security needs of most of government are incomprehensible to my former colleagues -- the national and homeland security experts whom I presume authored the secret initiative.

I also want to point out that because most of government is open, most government employees and officials don't have national security clearances and thus one must wonder how they will implement the secret cyber initiative.

Now, I grant you, I could have this all wrong. The initiative could be the greatest thing since sliced bread. It could be appropriately risk-based, business enabling, cost-effective, and efficient, but, how would I know? How would anyone know?


Glenn Schlarman
Retired (formerly OMB)

What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.

Featured

  • Congress
    Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.) at the Hack the Capitol conference Sept. 20, 2018

    Jim Langevin's view from the Hill

    As chairman of of the Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committe and a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rhode Island Democrat Jim Langevin is one of the most influential voices on cybersecurity in Congress.

  • Comment
    Pilot Class. The author and Barbie Flowers are first row third and second from right, respectively.

    How VA is disrupting tech delivery

    A former Digital Service specialist at the Department of Veterans Affairs explains efforts to transition government from a legacy "project" approach to a more user-centered "product" method.

Stay Connected

FCW INSIDER

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.