tv INSA Intelligence Conference Intelligence and Law Enforcement Leaders CSPAN September 9, 2017 8:00pm-9:10pm EDT
sculpture 41 $.2 billion. this is the type of waste in our government >> and sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. >> fbi director christopher wray and nsa director mike rogers joined other intel officials this week to discuss the importance of intelligence gathering and sharing. they outline security challenges they face trying to protect u.s. citizens from potential threats. this was of a daylong summit cohosted by the intelligence and national security alliance and armed forces to medications and electronics association. it is just over an hour.
>> i am honored to be asked to conduct this conversation we will draw you into in a few minutes. i will ask each of the directors and the deputy director support an opening assessment of their agencies and i will follow up with a little bit of detail and we will go to some general discussion and turn to you. with our first public appearance by new fbi wray, and director i want to ask the simple as question. how is it going? agency inerseeing an the news. what surprises you? what do you want to fix? >> at first, i would say i would love to be here when i still haven't figured anything out. , am only a month into the job
so hopefully i can answer as many questions as i can. it took 10 me, seconds of walking back in the fbi building to remember how much i missed it and how excited i was to be back in the fold. walking around the building, meeting people, trying to meet with every division and get out in the field. it has been inspiring and it reminded me why i loved the place so much when i worked there before. i would say for the most part, fewer surprises than not. the things that were great about the bureau are still great about the bureau. people are mission focused no matter what job they had. they are passionate about it. they are determined to be the best at what they do and they cover the waterfront. orientedvery detail and they bring the integrity i
always found so attractive when i worked as a life prosecutor and later after 9/11. noticedthe things i that have been surprising and encouraging are sort of the strides have been made since i left. it is a little bit like the analogy of when, when you are watching your own child grow every day, you don't notice how tall they are getting. but when you see somebody else's kid, you go, when i last saw you, you are only this tall and now look at you. there is a little bit of that at the bureau right now. there are a few areas of like to call out, but many i can't call out at this time. but the integration of intelligence into the overall mission. at this point, people start to take it for granted. 2001-2005, the fbi was
the ugly duckling of the intelligence community and now the sophistication of the products that are generated, the degree to which intelligence analysts are integrated with case agents in everything from the basic training to the day-to-day cadence of the place is really remarkable. is can see how intelligence driving everything they are doing every in a way i think it -- doing. in a way i think is formidable. i give huge marks to both my predecessors and pushing that along. thatnk another area presently surprised me is in the area of partnerships. the fbi ishich partnering with state and local law enforcement and other members of the intelligence committee, those things were all
happening back in the early 2000's, but it was much beer, much more episodic, much more inconsistent with now it's life dayre of a way of in and day out. it doesn't mean there is no room for improvement, but it is striking. the third area i would mention is on the technology front. i think as exciting as some of the strides we have made in the technological arena in terms of countering threats, and i assume will talk more about the threats our bit, i think adversaries and their progress , in my humble view, is exceeding our ability to keep up. i think that's a place we have to buckle down and work collaboratively in a way we are not quite yet different
agencies, the private sector, etc. or we have a scary road ahead of us in terms of the role of technology for our adversaries. those are just a few observations off the top of my head. i'll ask you a question about an investigation that is one of many, many you have underway, but one the country is focused on. russianthe focus of the interference in the 2016 election campaign. i want to ask you as directly as i can whether you feel confident and comfortable in conducting that investigation, you are free of any interference or pressure from the white house or the president. >> i can say confidently that i have not affected any with of interference with that investigation. of interference with
that investigation. i have in a was respect for former director mueller. he is really running the investigation. the fbi dedicated agents to it. i have confidence in them to be able to do their jobs efficiently. -- professionally. they have a cap intelligence committee geared toward prevention -- counter intelligence committee geared toward prevention and russian interference in a future election. there is an overlapping mission there and i am impressed with the strides that have been made on that front, as well. >> thank you for responding to that directly. let me turn to admiral rodgers. admiral, your area of cyber offense and defense is at the
center of concern for everyone in this audience. tour atfinishing up a sa --s a -- at n [laughter] >> nearing the final lap of a tour. >> so they tell you. >> miscible question i want to put to you is -- the simple question i want to put to you is, tell us about your time running the nsa and how you think the agency is doing and what you think the audience needs to know about your requirements, the issues you are looking at in the private sector to help you solve. after three and a half years as the director of the nsa, the fundamentals remain changed. -- remain unchanged.
of our nation, that of our friends and allies and the safety of our citizens and the second aspect of our mission, generating mission assurance and insights that help ensure the cyber security of our nation and our allies. the second fundamental unchanged is the great men and women of the organization. that's the best part of the day for me. that can men and women be doing a lot of other things and making more money, but who believe in what they are doing. i literally just did a global town hall with the workforce this morning earlier and i said, with a motivated workforce doing something that matters, i hope you are walking out and coming into work feeling motivated and good about what we a doing and how much it matters. i wanted to say thanks to at workforce. when i step back and see the challenges, the positive side is
that we can ll you we can generate great insight. the flipside i it continues to be more difficult to do it. it comes with challenges. with a great workforce, you can overcome lots of things. the power of partnership remains important. it's what i like about venues like this. as well as a broader s of partners within the international arena. it's our ability to bring these partnerships to generate outcomes. that is a real strength as a whole, a cornerstone of the global enterprise that the nsa is a part of. when i look at the challenges, how do you sustain a workforce? how do you keep it with the skill sets that it needs that keeps evolving and changing? as you are looking to hire people, i was just reviewing the fiscal 2018 hire plan and i was
thinking, are we making the right that's? bets? re: going to need them 5, 10 are we goingw -- to need them 5, 10 years from now? we continue to generate the knowledge the nation is counting on. i have been doing cyber on and off for 30 years and i have been a cyber individual for 15. it is the toughest problems i have worked. no so the bullet or single solution and the power is, how do you bring togher these partnerships and do it at a sustained level and how do you hate?t of the traditional that issomething public not going to work for us. i believe this is a national security challenge and it takes a national security approach.
the total power of our nation and the intelligence is how we will deal with it every -- deal with it. >> you and i talked about section 702 and i kw that you are deeply concerned about reauthorization of that. perhaps you can explain to the audience, as you think about the future and do your contingency planning, what would be the consequences of that not being reauthized in terms of your ability to colct intelligence? >> the vice president of the united states visited yesterday and we spent time with him and one of the things i said to him was, i know of no ability that this organization has to replace that which is -- we are able to access because of the authority under 702. if this was removed and not reauthorized, currently set to
expire september 2017, i cannot overcome that. generatesk at 702, it significant segment of nsa's ability to generate insights, counterterrorism, proliferation, what other actors are doing over the course of the next 90 days or so before the authorities expires. we and others will be part of a brder dialogue to educate and inform as congress makes up its mind as to what they are comfortable with. be part of a broader dialogue trying to design a greater sense of understanding of what is this statutory authority you keep referring to as 702. that is what enables us to conduct investigation overseas against non-us persons, non-us lawons for a series the outlines a specific set of purposes. we do this based on an authority
anted to us by the court and we have to show how we are complying with the law. there is very valid concerns which i understand. we go to great lengths to ensure protection of our citizens are ssing. we a knowledge that in the course of conduct of 702, we will run into u.s. person information, which is why we put several protectionin place by the court of law to who can access the data to how we are allowed to use the data to ensure we are providing appropriate protections. we take that siously. it's part of the law and we believe in it. we will work our way through this and it would be a truly significant act not in our nation's best interest to withdraw the legal authority currently granted to us under section 702. director caella, i want to ask you to give us an overview of how things are going at the
, your very specific mission set and changing environment that affects people in the audience. >> it is a pleasure to be here on stage again with my colleagues and friends. it's also always a privilege to be able to represent the men and women of the agency. also appropriate, i follow mike discuss wherey to my profession is right now is to use an analogy that nsa has successfully been through. if you think of the an assay commission set as the world transitions -- nsa transmission set as the world transitions to work out thected credit a great opportunity for busiss and education and
.opulation information nsa had to change its mind set on how to engage. he just talked about the challenges of those engagement the values they provide from mission insight and protection. it's not a perfect analogy and in many ways, we use the intelligence for a life transition. ere he once did our work with government access, and security, government control, we now live in a world where areas have been reduced to admission to that field, which is that thing for many parts of our society. partners,players, opportunities. the challenges i have is, how do i advance the light proposition
in flatter, more disruptive world? this room is one example. never could do our job without the partners in this room. that has always been true. the mission partner to the thought -- the fact you all bring access to understanding of, algorithmic approaches to these new data connectivitys new to create that understanding and insight, we never could do it todayis even more true and will be even more true tomorrow. these keyes, i have resources, our human capital, expertise within the agency. our challenge is, how do we create the right agility to work with you and the clutter the acquisition progress to enable your innovation to get to my
desktop sooner? had we lift the skill set of the workforce that needs to be more data savvy and copy occasionally knowledgeable and away that provides advantage on the other side. fundamentals have not changed. we call it locational dominance. if we hold on to how we geit in the past, and not advance, we put ourselves at risk as an agency, that's less important. we put our mission at risk in respect to protecting the nation and government. i look to learn the lessons, good and otherwise, because as i said, there is much for us to benefit from a transition mike has been through. >> as you said, you had a near geo and that has now
exploded as you have 190 satellites overhead requiring constant real-time imagery. the question a lot of us are curious about, how do you keep an advantage with the united states? how do you make it possible for policymakers as i have heard you say, go into what hopefully is an unfair fight because you have advantages nobody else does? have you get advantages in this new world? >> that is the right question. i will start and finish the answer with our people. because when did it comes out of ties and axis is more open and access isers -- more open and the barriers can be reduced, one can imagine things could get more equal and we don't want to be in equal
business, we want to be in advantage business. part of the answer is our expertise. byt is the insight created the lack of data. what isn't happening that tells ushat somebody's intention or future activity. this room comes to play. especially in a flat and open world, the person that can most actually apply the information you create and a time frame that faster, that is how you sustain an advantage. that goes to agility. at the end of the day, what hasn't changed and what won't change is that it will come down to the software that is up in the head. datais the meaning of the as icomes together. invocation -- implication,
the corollary of a bit of information that melissa picks up tt creates a moment of operational time decision space that gives the decision-maker the advantage when he or she needs it. that's the only definition of success. >> turning to deputy director driscoll, u helped run an agency that is consuming the intelligence is provided by your colleagues on this stage, also analyzing it, making it useful for policymakers. give us an overview of how things are going, the issues you armost focus on. i think myo say and boss would agree, things are going well. we are very excited. we talked about partnerships. the partnerships are imptant
in we are trying to build stronger partnerships. the important thing for us, we found we have toefocus more of our eney on what the director considers to be our no fail missions. russiahina, north korea, , and violent extremists. we had to rededicate ourselves and we are committed to that. what we found is, we have been able to come as you are to conflicts and rally and pull things together. these nuclear adversaries, we can't do that. we have a fodational intelligen, a solid foundation that will coinue to add to that foundation. that means taking advantage and dealing with the data he talked about. , muche to be data centric
more savvy and how we handle data. the volume of ta, the velocity and variety of the data. my colleagues are great at sending it our way, both classified and unclassified. there are secrets there we have to find. how do you find the secrets? that is part of what our collectorsnd for to take advantage of that to cute the next target. queue the next target. one thing i will say, and we are looking at algorithmic analysis, artificial intelligence, we are finding we need to examine what is the role of the human? a lot of people talk about this, but it is kind of scary for our analysts and some of our other folks. in businesses as well, not just the core analytic collection. what do we look like in 10
years? thats some of what we are doing right now. what does the analyst look like, the environnt in 10 years? as we try to definet, does that make it obsolete and what does it look like? i am fcinated i that. have does the human being value and that is what i'm trying to explore. that wl also drive us to the decision about the kind of people we hire and draw in the future. we have a lot of very smart, very inquisitive people with strong work ethics and are tech savvy. i'm not sure we can radically change the kind of people we hire with a contract or government, but we need to give them a realistic expectation of the environment they are likely to operate in. every new folks about leavg their cell phones at the door and it will not be able to download every app they
want. we try to make them feel it is not so restrictive and create ways to come in and innovate and expose them to the art of the possible. that is one the challenges we have is toeep that creativity a life. to create that environment, do things in that regard. what is the role of humans? analysts andth technical collectors and what i find personally is those that ask the smart questions. theyan interact with the data and say, what about this? that is what we are looking for. let them dos to this intuitively the frustrations i have is, someone shows up with a tool and shows me this wonderful tool and gazillionpay a dollars and that is not helpful. i constantly ask analysts, are
you playing? can i play with it? if i can come anybody can. i'm not old lady, but i'm old enough. [laughter] so how do we deliver those things a smart cookie can work with and play with? and continue to iterate that. one of the things we are having to looat as a busine is, what are the things we need to invest in? we have had a lot of things latched onto us, stapled onto us, the crowed to us. owed onto us. it is not something that logically falls into our mission. that is another issue. >> let me ask you about a specific danger that aects
many of your fellow panelists and also of interest to the audience. that is the threat that the dia assesses, space-based assets. reading genel stewards threat assessments inmate wasn't striking when he talked about russia and china. the language he used about the seriousness of their efforts to develop anti-space weapons. i want to ask you to draw that out a little bit and give us a sense of how the dia looks at the problem and the thoughts you have for the audience. >> there is no doubt the russians and chinese see this as an area they absolutely want to challenge, the u.s. and that domain. and the effect that they can have, some say is catastrophic. i think that's true.
about on orbit and the terrestrial front. we are interested in both environments. hostile, it is a inaccessible environment, so how do we understand what is going on? and our perspective, we are all source agency, understanding what the capabilies are in terms of reversible and irreversible. when would they employ one or the other? and along that whole spectrum, what good are they and what is their intent to do that? obviously, we work with our colleagues here. one thing we he done recently ofstood up to integration collectors and analysts into a space, counterspace office.
focus try to draw more d understand what they want to do with us but also understand their dependency and vulnerabilities. we need to underand that particular dependency in terms of military conflict. we can try to mirror it, but we need to get more insight. >> >> finally, the same question to you. how do you think about your future challenge nga,u like -- you, like there is a lot of commercial activity being able to do what you do. how are you facing that? >> let me start with theno itself. it is a great time to be at that nro. our mission, in terms of building the nation, it doesn't get any better than that and we have been fortunate to be able to attract and amazing work for
us of a scientist and engineers. -- this year,lis we have already had two launches providing amazing capabilities for the nation and we had our first time on the space ask rocket, a phenomenal success. coming up this fall, we have something else he our featured -- featuring in the intelligence community. i am developing our next generation satellite and all of those acquisitions are going amazingly well. were showed to bgrn on costs, and schedule, another success for us. we received, last november our ghth clean financial audit, consecutive, the only agency to have a clean audit, and we are working on our ninth this year. we continue to invest research and if element almost every year
on new capabilities, saving multiple. dividends for us we have actually put together comprehensive strategy for protection of our space assets and ground assets. that is a really critical pnt david, that if we are not there for the fight, we are worthless. so we will be there for the fight both in the space and the ground systems. we have forced an amazing partnership with general raymond at the national space command, rtnership between the intelligence committee and the dod, great cooperation among the organizations actually be able to understand the threats that are out there and take preventive action and protective action as a unified nation. finally, our systems are amazingly flexible and agile. we are able to provide coverage anytime and anywhere, throughout the globe, an amazing opportunity. to follow up on commercial, it
is a question similar to whai o.ked director cardi david ignatius: in this world, how does the nro keep its special sauce? director club valley: -- >> we are able to do basic imagery resolution from low orbits, and that frees us up as a nation to invest in the more exotic things about commercial will never do, capabilities which will give us an edge in the future. --nk been i am excited frankly i am excited about the opportunities and it frees us the dollars in investment. it is a great opportunity for the nation. david ignatius: i would like to turn to questions from the
audience. you had the procedure of submitting questions, which i can see on my ipad here. from a specialne it -- one which was of special interest to me, it involved insider threats. we have all se a disturbing hemorrhage of information, the most secret information from intelligence agencies and contractors. i uld like to ask you, hois your agency dealing with this, and in particular, how can you do better in a dealing with insider threats without creating a work environment that is no rigid, that you end up dring away your most creative people? admiral roger, i know you have thought about this, which elect to lead off? director rogers: it starts off with dialogue. i did a mobile town hall with the workforce and this was one of the topics we raise
about what we are doing and why we are doing it and why it is important to you and the organization as a whole. what i think the obligations are five and. the future the biggest thing to me, it is both technical and never underestimate the cultural challenge of this. how did the cultural -- part of that cultural challenge, and i have said this to our leadership, we have to find a balance here. of security becomes of that we drive away the very men and women who generate rally in the first case, we now have a self-induced mission killer. a bad place for us to be. in the same token, we do not want to be too much. everything is about generating maximum outcome and when security as a secondary to your objective, i reject that. so how do we find a middle ground? and how do we also talk to the workforce, which is one of the one of thed today --
expectations of an intelligence professional in the 21st century, what is your role as an individual granted access to incredibly sensitive information , that if it was placed in the wrong hands, not only an ginger's the security of our nation, but potentially has an impact on our citizens? at is not where we asked intelligence professionals want to be. our nation grants of great authority and capability because its competence. we are generating valley and doing it in a way that complies with the law and ensures that we are mindful of the privacy and rights of everyone of our individuals. when we are talking about the insider threat, i try to frame it in those terms. the other thing that i urge is, we get a lot of people saying -- the answer is it is all about contractors. i say, stop. go back. uniforms who have cpromised
security information, i can tell u about them, every organization. fbi agents, nsa people, cia people, there is no organization that has not had this challenge. the answer is not that it is one particular last or type of individual. do weswer is, how institutionally and structurally step up and ask ourselves, how do we make some fundamental change here? the last point i would make, is that we need to do this on a risk-based approach. reallyhe data, that is of the most greatest concern to us, that represents the greatest potential vulnerability if it were exposed? we want the same approach, the , if you will come a trade off with that which is incredibly important, where it be compromised? whereas information, while it is sensitive about would not have the same impact?
we need to be leery of a one-size-fits-all approach and step back and look at different approaches to how we are doing. david ignatius: that as turned to director sray. -- director wray. leaks, speak to this issue, as you thk about it. you would like to talk about the thing that people in my business worrybout, too constricting of an approach to information. tell us, as you come into the fbi, how do you think about the insider threat problem? arector wray: this is priority that we take very seriously, as mike says, every agency has its issues, and i think we all learn from the experiences that we have all had. we try to talk about it very much in terms of what is the culture of the organization, the
shared culture of security, which is a part of who we are, and the shared accountability. as a reflection of how seriously we take it, and insider threat center which is designed and was recently elevated to ve more executive oversight and leadership in the fbi. the focus is on tryingo indicators,look at patterns, behavioral signs which would historically indicate an insider threat. not so much in targeting of a particular person, but rather, to try and learn things about the way that we operate, that due stress and vulnerabilities. that is part of it. i reject the idea that creativity and security, that it is a binary thing.
i think we can have innovation and security at the same time, and sometimes the distance between point a and went to be is a little bit more circuitous and cumbersome. but having to deal with security, while it might be more of a challenge i do not think it -- into tefl innovation eestnet stifle innovation. -- we do not think it needs to stifle innovation. it does not mean that people should be out experimenting in a broke fashion, but there is a place and time -- experimenting in a broke fat -- in a broke rogue fashion. on the leak front, we are focused on it from a perspective of respecting very much the role
of people in your industry and the important role of the free press, what it plays in our society. iny experience, having done a lot of leak investigations before, moreften than not, the leaks are not coming from somebody in the inside circle of knowledge in the first instance. and happens is person a government walks down the hall and tells peon b about wha just happened in the meeting, cd person b talks to a person and with hearsay, someonelse is talking to a reporter. --ponse to the tenets of respecting the tenets of need to know, a critical part of the system of classified information that we have, i think is something that we would all benefit from having and having the shared accountability and responsibility for the information that we are all trusted with. david ignatius: thank you, am
glad to hear that the new director of the fbi is speaking in this fashion. i will go to questions so the audience. one of the questions i found fascinating, i am curious to hear the answers to this. the subject line is "disruptive technologies." what is the single most disruptive technology afcting your agency check out mission and how are you dealing with it? how can the industry help? if maybe director cardillo -- director cardillo would start with that? director cardillo: part of our history includes decades of trained conditioned, labeled data sets. what we have done for a long time and it is what we do today. in a world that is moving quickly in to artificial
intelligence, computer learning, that is fuel forisrupte technology. one of the things we are exploring now is an idea that we had, to take advantage of these government data sets, find a way to compete them fairly among the room, and for those who can apply the most innovative algorithm or application, or computer vision or learning application, and we cross level. i would share that field, you chair the engine, -- i chair the fuel, you chair the engine, and we both benefit. that is one way we are trying to deal with this disruptive technology. one more thing on ai that gives da.great pause, is artificial, the bedrock of our profession's credibility, and
trust. i walk into a room and i say, hey boss, i have some artificial intelligence for you. [laughter] really? you can imagine, we need to deal with what israel,hat is not, what is the veracity, what is the pedigree, where did you get that data from them etc. we all have that challenge. i would encourage the room, as we all race to the ai future, necessarily, we have to hold onto credibility. or we will lose our life blood. david ignatius: deputy dictor calvelli, any thoughts on the destruction coming? revolution, small and what we are finding is that there are some amazing opportunities to trust new things, very rapidly and quickly. whether that is materials,
cables, next-generation solar cells. things overg to get to testing pretty quickly. it has been disruptive in a positive way. the second thing that has been disruptive is the launch. we mentioned earlier that we launched our first satellite on a space x booster on may 1. lunch disruption allows us more opportunity to get systems in orbit. david ignatius: there is something that has been in the news, elon musk, onef our warned entrepreneurs has , as some other techlogists have, that he sees an artificial intelligence in the world of machine learning, immense danger in it.
he was recently quoted as saying that he sees a threat of a third world war and ai systems who spin out of conol. what do you think about that argument, that ai poses a real threat? director calvelli: it certainly represents a challenge. my view is that it all depends on where you decide a man or woman needs to be involved in the process. director rogers: i have seen it in my career in the united take navy, where we built unmanned engine rooms 30 years ago. we decided that e risk of not having individual walking around taking a look at the links, looking at oil and looking at we decided that we have the technology, we can do this, that the risk is. -- the riskwise, is too high.
have systemfrom tracking, analyzing, and gauges, based on the role sets they have programmed into the system, they will do it automatically. toed on experience, we can the conclusion, where do we need to retain the man? what part of this equation is the risk to unacceable level? when i look at ai, it is the same thing to me. i do not see it rogated everytngo a machine, i see it as king ourselves, where did this -- i see it asking ourselves, where did this technology helping us in terms of capability and where is the risk to high? even though we technically could do it, we do not think is acceptable or in our best interest -- we will not do that. i am not quite in the same place, to me it comes across as -- we will just be unthinking and turning everything over to the machines. just do not see it that way, personally. david ignatius: i will turn the
question of counterterrorism, which has been discussed earlier today. your agencies spend billion of dollars on high-tech answers to this problem, to maintain surveillance, protect the nation. what we are seeing as we look at europe, is that our terrist adversaries best weapon this days -- our terrorist adversaries choco best weapon these days is -- our terrorist adversaries'best weapon these days is a car careening down the road. the kind of threats that are coming at us, and in particular there is a concern about whether we have the ability to detect the homegrown, so cold "lone wolf" -- soalled "lone wolf" threat. that is not organized by a network that can be targeted by surveillance.
-- director wray are you comfortable with r ability to avoid the problems facing europe right now, what are you doing about that and what should we be doing more? director wray: i think that is the right question to ask you read -- the right question to ask. beth wright has evolved fromhe complex, structured, large cell terrorist operations that for exple, with 9/11, those are still there. but now, the kind of plots that we are talking about, the kind of attacks you are talking about are simpler and in some ways more complicated. simpler in the sense that you are talking about fewer peop involved in a particular attacks, easier access to whatever the weapon is, mor choice of soft targets as opposed to large, spectacular
ones and most importantly, much shorter time between the idea and the attack. about ato talk terrorist plot having this continuum from the idea to the planning to the preparation, to the fund-raising, all the way to the execution. detect andire to prevt it somewhere along that. if the lifespan isuch shorter, which it is with lot of these homegrown violent extremist type of situations, the need for us as a community to be more agile, which is a word that you heard i think several of my fellow panelists use, is much greater. so to me, i'm i comfortable that we are there? all of us are working with our partners overseas, with each other, and with local. it ties into something that mike mentioned earlier which is the importance o fisa 702.
it is most important in our ability to detect and prevent threats in that tiny window which is getti smaller and smaller and smaller. and over and over again, we see it being useful there. enabled us tool that to detect, for example, an isis proponent who was recruiting via social media. in the u.s., focusing on killing american servicemen and women, american law enforcement. they would not have been possible without 702. in fact, it heed us detect and prevent the new york subway plots from a few years ago. there is example after example. as the threat comes more condensed, more ability for the adversary to call and order ball
-- call and switch from a car to a gun, or a knife or something else, our ability to pounce during the critical window dends on that tool and a large part. >> i think part of the challenge here is being leery of being like kids to a soccer ball and going after the latest manifestation. for example, we have been seeing these "lone wolf"-like scenarios playing out in europe, we just dealt with some of the most complex aviation threats we have ever seen in terms of what happened in australia. one of the things i talked to our team about is optimizing ourselves to deal with this, being able to go after the "lone wolf" individual up to the complex, multilayered, time-consuming intricate extremes on either end we have to be capablef generating insights across the spectrum. we are always a little bit.ly or it, being involved in this, it
is a spectrum, and we have to be ab to deal with it. david ignatius: to come back y with one morera question, one of the real challenges for the fbi and local enforcement is to be in good contact with muslim communities, to have regular dialogue, so that when people see something they will say something, and you -- are you comfortable with the degree of interaction that the fbi has, is that something you would like to work more on? director wray: i think the fbi in my experience, and this is true of the. after 9/11 and remains very true tfs, largely through the jt around the country, but not
exclusively, we are focused on building ties arou all of the communities that. it protects. from the perspective of developingources. aside the sortg of more visible plic, political discourse, down on the ground and out on the front lis, at the professional level, i think, in my experience, fbi and they and local law enforcement do a pretty good job of hing it both ways. building the relationships b also at the same time the intestine when it is warranted -- at the same time being tough when it is warranted. david ignatius: there cannot be a person in the room who has not been worried about this. the question is, what can be done to fix the security clearance process, -- [laughter] so that community and industry partners can hire personnel.
speakers yesterday asserted that 700,000 applicants are waiting for clearances. why is it so hard, just to get a person'clearance transferred from one agency to another? viously, this is something that our audience is deeply interested in, deputy director drisko, which you like to lead off? dep. director drisko: we ask the same thing! why is it taking so long? who do we have to call to get this person cleared through? i do not know how to solve that, how much risk are we willing to take, how many checks and balances do we need to have in terms of clearing people. clearances,ssing it is a trust issue, as much as anhing between agencies. it is also differences in the degree of -- i will talk about
polygraphs, for ample, which is what we use. everyone has to have a polygph when they come into the dia, but it is a certain kind of polygraph and other agencies have a different kind of polygraph. there are differences in how we veteople. -- h we but if a bat, you have to go you to the start point if go to other agencies and for us it is one area thawe have run into. david ignatius: and the other panelist have a thought about what to do about this -- i do not want to use the word nightmare lightly, but when you talk to people, it sounds le one. what do you think? >> i think part of the answer is continued evaluation. odni pilotged in a to introduce part of our workforce to this process, i do not know if it will fix the initial backlog which you just
deribed, people starting in line, but perhaps it will, if we can reduce some of the what is now the periodic investigation law which consumes the same resources. perhaps we could dedicate to the initial betting, so that we get the court trust and then, ife can get the help again, doinit more,omation, so of it in commercial practice when peoplere trying to see if theifinances are being protected or other intellectual property -- we have the same challenges. i think that the more we can bring those types those applications, the better. david ignatius: a practical business question on acquisition reform. nsa recently published a paper with recommendations on improving the i.c.e. processes for requiring service expeise. howan your agencies make the cumbersome acquisition process more efficient?
what can government and industry do differently? li, maybe youel could start us off? director calvelli: we need to hold our timelines, to get through the process as quickly as we can, including -- important process of oversight from external organizations like the dni and others, they have played a critical role in our success. we also need to get really good quality proposals from industry. when you get really good quality proposals, the process goes smoother. if you end up having to go back up, the answers and discussions and rewrite, it drives the process. it is critical that realistic information and realistic cost proposals coming back in, is key to improving the
process. david ignatius: i would like to ardillo aboutc your idea of having a brokerage scheme to share ideas between and the role of companies in this room who are developing algorithms and waste to deal with data? director cdillo: the implementations that i am finding are prettyomplex. we have these extensive data sets and we believe that there is ohio valley and them. as you move to computer -- there is high value in of them and we try to make them competitively available to you and see if we caexchange for that access, your innovative application at the same data -- of the same data. if i could just pile on to frank's answer, we will always buy things, and by hardware and buy hardware and
and software. over time, we will add services, which i belie should be part of the answer to youquestion on ality. we are now in our second year of experimenting with a gsa-like approach, where you would vet and get credited with gsa for your services. we would then use, once you had that approval, it would be more of a transaction-like exchange which would have gone through all of the requirements that frank talked about. at the point of need, you could have the interruption much more qukly. nro -- acquisition is a big skill set. for the rest of us, acquisition is not qui the same.
speaking for the organization, i impart of the nsa, and one of the things we talk about is stepping back and asking ourselves, what is -- what it is acquisition aake big skill set for us? it has not been the norm and it has been an area which i think we can significantly improve. the other thing is, it is all relative. the guy who straddles the cyber command, the traditional dod entity, -- we were just granted acquisition all of 30, -- quisition all authority. [indiscernible] i say, we haven't a whole lot better than our dod tradition. military contracts i have a lot more authority and capacity to make acquisitions as an ic leader than i do as a city military commander at the dod.
david ignatius: a question of special relevance to director wray. what is the extent of russian influenc operations in the u.s. as well as europe? how confident are you that the ice the understand -- the ic understands the threat? very, no, just kidding. i would say that from the information that i have read, i have read a unclassified ica wh i was going through the confirmation process and now i have had the opportunity to see it a lot more fully. -- the ica, i think you were referring to the generally
sixth -- the generally sixth document, and i would say that i have no reason to doubt the conclusions of the hard-working people who put the document together. is annow that there enormous a month of attention focused on this issue. a lot of people take it very seriously. -- an enormous amount of attention. we have our arms fully around any risk, as anybody who has had involvement with surveillance of different sources, whether it is technical or physical surveillance -- it is extraordinarily resource-intensive. you start running into the part isolation -- prioritize nation ritization, how you diffentish the
threats when new ones are getting added and the older ones are not going away, how do you make the human judgment to par ties this one or that one. that is something that i worry about. risk, and is a known i think people are trying to deal with it. david ignatius: a question from the audience for admiral rodgers -- how concerned are you about the cyber securi of the navy's fleet? could cyber attacks has had anything to do with the two recent collisions involving navy vessels? is the navy more generally prepared for cyber attacks? director rogers: there is an ongoing efrt to review and in the case of that uss mccain situation, we have heard he spoken out publicly abouthat. i will not speak for the united states navy in this case, but the conclusion hydro with the cyber enterprise, is that welcome to a world in which the
ability to say that cyber was or was not factor in an accident or situation, that is the world we're living in now. how do we work our way through the processes we will put in place? you are seeing this play out in the john s mccain scenario. how do we put in place a means to ensure that the expertise as part of our normal investigating processes. determine how the ship was damaged? traditionally, it has not been a primary part of our thought process that the digital age is driving it. business question, of special interest, i think, to people from aller-medium-sized companies in the audience about innovaon. innovative technology companies have a hard time working through the federal procurement process. how effectively is the ic
incorporating cutting-edge technologies from startups and other small companies. darpa andes like others aid in this. and how do you help such small companies cut through the red tape? isi think the broad answer that we are doing betterhan we were, not as good as we needed to be. we have already talked about some of the things we have tried , and to lower the barriers especially for smaller companies trying to get their foot in the door. inqutel,oned iux, and we realize that some of these companies, people may not know that they exist. we have decided to move to where these companies are, and of
course, that means silicon valley but it also means austin, st. louis, boston, new york. toare putting our scouts begin those conversations, in a way that perhaps they were not hang before. we know that we can do better here though. david ignatius: director calvelli, how can our n huge, cutting edge agency which is supersecret, how does it deal with the world of small companies and startups? director calvelli: a lot of the classified, weis publicize it and put it out there in the news, we take unclassified from academia, from any unclassified front that is out there th was to have innovave ideas which can help us in terms of our mission. andind six of them per yea
the good ones and of becoming noncssified and used in our space or ground systems. we also have -- our ground director recently put out an and a videoed -- put out about unclassified system and we awarded about four or five contracts based on that. there are lots of ways out there that we get through to rnds there are unclassified and open to everybody. davidgnatius: i have the last question directed to deputy director drisko who has worked in different places in the ic. you have fonew generations starting work at your agencies? what skills and experiences do these young people have to succeed and how can you improve a hiring process, how can agencies compete for talent if contractors and tech firms when it takes more than one year
for applicants to get their security clearance? well, wector drisko: do really cool works, so please stick with us. that the security clearance as part of the process and we are doing what we can on both ann's to shorten that time. is, i would tell them talked about it before, we are looking for really inquisitive people, really smart, that goes without saying, that really inquisitive. in and that coming asking a lot of questions, challenging people to explain what they are doing and why they're doi it, there are better ways to do it -- and just be patient. -- admiralobligation rodgers taed about what we expect from people, but, yes,
just come in and be prepared to do really cool work. david ignatius:, with that invitation, we bring the panel to one and. this is a rare opportunity to have such high-level talent running such an important agent -- such important agencies. please join me in thanking them for being with us. [applause] announcer: tt same national security summit also included gordon who served as deputy director of national intelligence. she outlined top parties for the intelligence community. >> thank you, jill. were listening to the introduction, we agreed that we saved the best for last. formally, represented one of the great agencies. >> yes,. >>