The new reporting mandate is designed to encourage compliance with the law and increase the quantity and quality of cyber incident reporting
Steven G. Stransky is a partner and co-chair of the Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group at Thompson Hine LLP. He is also an adjunct law professor at the Frederick K. Cox International Law Center at Case Western Reserve University School of Law where he teaches on foreign affairs, national security law, and constitutional war powers. Prior to joining Thompson Hine, Mr. Stransky served in the federal government for ten years, including as a deputy legal adviser on the president’s National Security Council and as an attorney-advisor for intelligence law at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
Where is Congress on cyber reporting requirements?
The NDAA created new programs for combating white supremacy and domestic terrorism, but it omits two important proposals included in earlier versions of the bill. The Biden administration should consider adopting both into its security strategy.
Domestic organizations need to be cautious of COVID-19-related phishing attacks, which have the potential to cripple business and administrative operations during the time of a health emergency.
Recently, Lawfare published a compelling article by leading former national security officials on the similarities between international terrorism and domestic terrorism, and the problems caused when governments seek to draw an overly rigid distinction between the two.
On Jan. 29, the heads of six agencies in the U.S. intelligence community delivered annual testimony in front of the Senate intelligence committee about global threats to U.S. national security. As could be expected, the nature and scope of contemporary cyber threats and electoral security was of significant interest at the hearing, which included the director of national intelligence, the CIA director, and the FBI director.
The White House recently released its National Cyber Strategy, and lawyers and privacy advocates alike should pay careful attention to its “priority actions” related to surveillance and criminal law reform.