tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg December 14, 2016 6:00pm-7:01pm EST
♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city this is charlie rose. charlie: cyber security has become one of the greatest challenges facing this country. last february, president obama created a commission to address the growing threat. earlier this month, the commission on enhancing cyber security announced its finding in a conference of report. it called for urgent action to enhance cyber capabilities. president obama last week ordered a review of allegedly election hacking. joining me now are the commission chairs, sam polisario and former national security
adviser tom donnellan. i'm pleased to have both of them here. tell me briefly and then we will turn to some other issues and come back to the report how this came about. the president looked at what the challenges were and things that have been addressed in the first seven years of his term and determined there were a number of challenges that continued. essentially what this was was a preparation of a transition memo for the next president. , the director of national intelligence, has for the last three or four years in each of his presentations to the congress on what the major threat facing the united states are has ranked cyber security number one. and it's just not the case that this country has treated it as the number one threat. andave far more resources emphasis in mind share and
attention to counterterrorism, which is appropriate, but in terms of a whole range of your under focused on the cyber security challenge. charlie: what did you do? withi was honored to serve tom as the private sector counterpart to this. we looked at areas to focus on, , in broad terms, the issues around the security of the internet itself, identity magic -- identity management, the internet of things -- it is no longer your phone or computer, it's cameras, sensors, traffic monitors and health devices. potentially devices were a hack or at some -- a hack or some issue could occur. systems andate processes of the government, how government response to cyber versus counterterrorism.
standards -- nal charlie: how did you do your work? we had activities on the west coast and in a couple in washington. we had six hearings. charlie: is it fair to say most people are vulnerable? sam: i think most people who are uninformed are vulnerable. if you are aware of the technology, you can do things to protect yourself. it is important everyone understand that there is no 100% solution in today's environment for a cyber threat. there are great benefits to the technology, whether it's economic expansion, personal life issues, but everybody should be sensitive to the fact is no 100% technical assurance this will not happen to their company or to the individual.
you dealt with vladimir putin, you dealt with the chinese and you know something about their record with respect to hacking. talk to me about how you see the crisis we now face in terms of the president ordering an investigation into whether the russians hacked and finding out what was done and why. secondly, chuck schumer, john anain, jack reed calling for investigation. the president wants to investigate. congress once to investigate when they go back in january. what do you think is going on? tom: an investigation is fully appropriate at this point. he had some private sector organizations saying russian entities, russian directed associationh a long of russian intelligence services
were responsible for hacking into the democratic national committee and others. nationaldirector of intelligence, jim clapper, who represents 17 intelligence agencies announced publicly that the russian federation directed from the government itself was involved in hacking. you had admiral mike rogers come -- cyber command, that's right, say the wall street journal conference say you had a country and it was clearly russia that had interfered, tried to interfere in the election to get specific effects. thisussians deny all of and say we don't engage in cyber attacks. that of course is just not true. my own judgment, i have not seen the intelligence, but as a broad matter, there's no doubt based
on what we've said publicly that the russians are trying to interfere with the elections here and it is part of a broader strategic approach by the russians. this is information warfare. espionage happens. the information was acquired and then made public for certain purposes. intent withge the specificity, but clearly, some intent was intended with respect to the elections and it's part of a broader confrontation we are having with putin's russia. charlie: there's no doubt in terms of these intelligence agencies, they report to him and he reports to the president. there is no doubt in their mind that there was hacking by the russians. what you seem to have today is some difference as to whether the intent was to help donald trump's election. reports in the press say the fbi
has not reached that conclusion but the cia has. clear, which is why there needs to be an investigation, that's the point. it is the next ordinary thing -- a foreign power that has gone quite hostile to the united came backce putin into office in the spring of 2012 has attempted to interfere with the elections of the united states and we should find out exactly what happened, what the intentions were and what the effects were. bolton, there may be trump appointed to the state department, former u.s. ambassador has said the following -- when the question came up about whether hillary clinton's server had been hacked , it was said we don't know, but we saw no evidence of it. the russians, if they did it are smart enough not to leave any evidence and and points to what is happening now.
how are they so sure? did the russians leave evidence on one side but not that they did on the other? process thata takes into account all manner of information. together in analytical judgment and i know quite a bit about the intelligence committee. it is not conceivable the director of national intelligence would say with high confidence the russian federation has attempted -- if they did not have a good case for that. again, this is why the country needs to know about this. charlie: the question is important regardless of what the motive was. an election and we are going to go forward, but it is important for the country to know what the vulnerabilities were from a technical perspective and important from a strategic perspective to know
at the direction of vladimir putin tried to interfere. have a case if we of china trying to interfere in an election. charlie: you want to do two things -- you want to alert america to the dangers of not being prepared with cyber security. the second question is how do you do that? sam: multiple steps. president obama was gracious enough to review it and suggest that we meet with the president-elect's team. some of the appropriate members of his team and take them through their recommendations. there are steps any administration could do. there are things that can be done like establish a collaborative initiative between the private sector and public sector so make it harder for them to identify or hack you and
the government could become the standard for best practices. they could do that themselves. the internet of things -- how to make those cameras more secure so whether you have a thermostat in your house or use a fitbit, they are more secure and the standards exist. address the biggest vulnerabilities and how they get individuals who are sloppy with our passport and those sorts of things or these devices that no one associates with being computers -- cameras, thermostats, etc.. then there's the government itself. i think tom is better to address the roles of the management system of government. technology, the first thing they could do is immediately consolidate their network. much like the military is consolidated, make it secure so
it's difficult to get access into the system itself. they make it harder to get into those systems. as all series of recommendations. we have had a conflict between silicon valley and the white house and justice with respect to backdoor entry and all kinds of things having to do with security for devices. tom: if you think about it pragmatically, the only way to --ve this problem is the come together at the big research universities. does the only way to solve the problem. charlie: why haven't they come together to do this? everyone realize that a problem here between balancing security and privacy.
tom: i will speak a little bit to the silicon valley side of things. the mindset of the companies has nothing to do with the individuals. think about tom watson senior who founded ibm. the carnegie's, the rockefellers, they just wanted to be left alone. now we have the technology version of this with these new social media companies. their preference when they come to work is leave us alone. don'things occur, they want to be burdened by requests from the government for all this information. they have the bias of leave me alone. the other biases there are situations to defend them for a second whereas the information they shared is used in a way that hurts their company's brand. the information and we talked about information sharing, do it in a way that their brands are protected.
we are making -- it starts with collaboration. the key for these instances is information sharing and the network providers to share the information in a way where they can do it in a secure way that protects them. it protects them from litigation and trial lawyers, but at the same time allows the government and authorities to have access to what they need to do their jobs. charlie: large companies are hit all the time. in terms of defensive measures. tom: we did this in our hearings. financial services, as much focus as a have, technology companies i think it is extremely good. but that the banks right up there with them. they are very good. our vulnerability is the midsize companies. they need to adopt the standard created in the government for
cyber security. part of what is this report is about. sam: what we tried to do is identify some of the coming trends. sam referenced the internet of things. we will have billions of devices connected in the future. the physical world and cyber world have converged. all the devices used everyday will be points of vulnerability. thatied to think about phone ability in the cyber security system. by designget security at the front-end on these devices and for consumers, to tell consumers that here are standards. this device is met standards through labeling. up, if youe growing had an appliance, if he had a
signal on it from an independent organization, you had confidence it was a state device. we don't have anything like that in the software world or internet of things world. you ask why it hasn't been done -- you have to put in place the incentives to do it. its product to market as quickly as possible. we are trying to put in place structures and incentive so security is not about. when the internet first game on, security was not the focus. are trying to get a number of these big trend right from the start. sam: there was a spot on your electronic prices for energy. we will have a cyber star so that you as a consumer will have this star that you know competes with some level with the standard of security.
that will help educate all the people associated with that. the incentives are interesting. we have felt it should be a market-driven approach versus a heavily regulated one. what is the balance of the right level of incentives? i think we can agree, including the private sector and the folks representing the government all daye we need security on one. educate the user and design in day one. don't have it be an afterthought. i did an interview with larry ellison from oracle and he said at the time, what is the nsa doing, after edwards noted. he said to me at that time,
there's so much stuff about individuals out there and 70 people have access, it's remarkable, what you can find out. if you were aware of that, you take precautions to take care of yourself like you do with your credit cards. of course you protect your credit card. it should be the same thing. you could say it's hard to use. thean be simplified but way tor, we have a whole address these vulnerabilities. guest: you are trying to make it easier forso the consumer to act. one of the priorities we ask for is to try to get the devices right that are easier to use and more naturally used in a
particular way. do we have a significant collaboration with the community? guest: i think we do. there were incidents along the way but i believe at the end of the day, there's a good working relationship between the tech community and government. , yous been especially true take dod or homeland, national security. there has been a relationship for years and continues to be. tom: one of the things we call for is deeper and faster sharing . to provide more incentive protections for companies concerned about certain phone abilities. give them more incentive to share with the government. one of the things at stake right now is the password. our evidence showed a few look at the last six years, most of
the major breaches are related to a flaw and identity, essentially password. there are offerings out there that can protect you -- multi factor authentication. but it is not being used broadly. charlie: people stand up at conference and say do it now. we call for his developed the best authentication you can. consumernment has mass facing portal/irs, health care, the v.a., dhs -- we should set an example and if you deal with those portals, those interfaces, you need to have stronger authentication. we should make every federal contract employee use them and try to get that moving through the system because whoever set up the conference you are at was right.
this is an incredibly important partial solution and if you are not doing it, you make yourself vulnerable. when you travel to moscow or beijing, do you usually cell phone or computer? guest: no. [laughter] they would give me a new one when i returned. they were completely replaced. i was trained to never leave the computer in your room. almost 35 your's go. i was trained back then not to do these things. some of us were trained decades ago. you returnedwhen as ceo of ibm, they would wipe your computer completely. i would have a whole new system that was cleaned up and secure. but when you here, click on your phone, they would
put a piece of software in your phone to monitor what's going on. if you are at work and behind your firewall, you are in the system at that point. charlie: isn't that what happened at sony? guest: it is much more sophisticated today. it is really hard to find out who it was for some of these because they will hijack somebody's server. japanijacked a server in and it came from north korea. they pack a server and come in that way. it's hard to find exactly the origination of it. the nationstates have gotten very good. guest: if you undertook the steps we outlined in this report
, you can significantly enhance your cyber security. we have offered to meet with the president-elect's team. we hope to hear from them. we hope they will give us an audience with the appropriate people. charlie: thank you. congratulations on the hard work you guys have done. we will be right back. stay with us. ♪
charlie: the boston marathon bombing thing the lives of three people and injured more than 150 in april of 2015. captivated manhunt the nation. " depicts the harrowing week from the perspective of the police, the victims and perpetrators. "the guardian" calls it a compelling and moving oh my gosh to the city and its spirit. here's a look at the trailer. ♪ >> why are you laughing? i look like a clown. i'm basically a crossing guard. >> give me a kiss. >> i love you. >> i love you.
charlie: i'm pleased to have peter berg, mark wahlberg and former boston police commissioner ed avis at this table. welcome one and all. -- ed davis at this table. you as a bostonian were reluctant to make the film too early. why? was is it question too soon and then we realize it's not soon enough. every day you turn on the news, there's another attack somewhere. we felt we wanted to promote that message, love will always win and we need to come together and unite. looking at how my own town reacted and responded, it is
amazing. it made me so proud to be a bostonian and i wanted to share that story with people. "60 minutes" got involved with this. guest: they got involved which as a writer, it was an extra ordinary resource. this gentleman, ed davis has counterparts in the fbi and others in the community. "60 minutes" was very effective at opening those doors and getting a candid relationship going with the commissioner very early which was very helpful in is putting the movie together. you?ie: john goodman plays how does he do? guest: he does an exceptional job. he's become a good friend. he's a good man. back to thee me time. you've never seen anything like this. you had no idea it would be possible for something like this
to happen in boston. guest: we prepare for possible terrorist events, but you never think it will happen. when i got there and saw these were built to kill and maim people and we had people dead at the scene, i realized the --rmity of the event and it and had h mende's sense of urgency to track these guys down and get them off the street. you also had the fbi on the site and there is a degree of conflict there. guest: there can be. we work closely on a bunch of different cases, but this is a complex undertaking and there's differences of opinion. those came to the for in our investigation. charlie: what is your recommendation to respond to a guest: terrorist attack? you need to have a plan, need to know where your resources are, and you need to have relationships with the fbi and
other responders that are going to be your partners of it all goes wrong. befored to know them hand. you can't be introducing yourself the day it happens. charlie: your character is a composite? yes. really focusing on two officers. one who is at the finish line was basically put in charge after the explosion and then one who was on the pursuit and that waterton when the other brother was captured. charlie: who did you reach out to? this is a city you love. mark: the first person i spoke to was my parish race to get his advice. charlie: what did he say? mark: he knew what my intentions were in wanting to tell the story. neighborhoodo my where i grew up and to the boys club to meet the ceo of the boys club and met with several different people, the officers, their victims and families. we had to meet with everybody and communicate what our
intentions were. once they knew that, they were extremely supportive because we intended to show what boston strong really means. charlie: there are people holding you responsible for portraying in the movie. they were happy that they knew it was in charge and who they could hold accountable. today started reaching out to me and telling me what they were comfortable with and what they were not. we did not want to make things worse, so we were willing to do whatever they asked of us. charlie: what was the challenge for you? peter: when i had the privilege of meeting so many people, and it was thanks to mark who brought me to that community. bostonians are extremely friendly but they are also guarded. ,hen we try to get information
the victims and survivors, these are victims who are not inclined to tell us their story right away. but once they did open up, they started telling us their stories and we met people like a young, beautiful couple in the beginning of their marriage and they were blown up and lost their legs. we saw their spirit and inspiration they passed on. the biggest challenge was making sure we did them proud and making sure we did the commissioner proud of. mark and i took that very seriously. our jobs paled in comparison to what they had gone through. we just wanted to make them feel respected and that we got it right. you said this was the most intense filmmaking experience of your life.
peter: and i have done three nonfiction films together now. they are all intents, but nse,e's -- they are all inte but these were all just regular folks. they were out enjoying themselves and suddenly there's led and death and body parts in the street. nobody was ready for it. that was very touching. to think about commissioner davis waking up that day, going about his day and to suddenly be the guy who it did actually happen on this watch and the president calls and says whatever you need, we've got your back? -- whatever you need, we got your back. guest: it was an incredible, unique experience. charlie: calling and saying we are behind you? guest: pledging all the
resources to this investigation. if we needed helicopters, helicopters landed. the military was on the scene with 1500 troops. it was a remarkable response. charlie: where they're people who felt it was too hard to relive this? yes, and it's understandable. we wanted to make sure we should the families of the victims. say in expect them to really like this movie. they are reliving the worst day of their lives and that is more than understandable. but to know we got it right and we wanted to honor them, that was very much appreciated. charlie: how did you depict the tsarnaev brothers? peter: it's hard to do any research on those two brothers. it's hard to research them and not become quite fascinated. it is a unique, bizarre
situation. not like they just came in and blew up the towers. these were assimilated guys. he was a marijuana dealer, ladies man. he had three girlfriends. i met two of them. one of them was a boxer and wanted to represent the u.s. at the olympics. charlie: how did they become radicalized? guest: through their family. also through the internet. seeing these extremists propaganda online, it is a refuge for people who are alienated. if someone wants to prove themselves, they can go in this direction. have forthy that you them in the movie is nullified by what he did. he placed a bomb near these two
children and lou them up. charlie: knowing he was going to take the lives of children. guest: and he did. charlie: is he talking? guest: i spoke to one of the jailers. was he under the influence of the brother? what is happening? the jailer said he's a terrorist. charlie: he knows it and it knowledge is it? guest: that's the only way to explain how he acts in prison. charlie: you wanted to show the courage of loss and strong. to the people who lost limbs, -- thered ones because were a lot of people who were near death. guest: 42 were critical and dozens of amputations. charlie: you wanted to so -- you wanted to show what? resolve,urage,
recovery, what real strength is and what real heroes are. we've always had these great, icon exports heroes and we always put on a pedestal. ted williams, larry bird, the list goes on. but to see men and women from all walks of life running toward the problem, that defined the term hero for me. they gave me a huge sense of pride to be from boston. when i left and was outside of people comeee together from all walks of life, all races, religions, it filled me with pride and i wanted to see that. people saidng where make sure you get it right and show people who we are and what boston strong means. charlie: how have they dealt with it, those people who lost a limb or loss of child? to see patrick and jessica
come together and radiate so much light, hope and positivity is remarkable to me. when we saw patrick finished the race, he ran this year on a running blade. him run into jessica's arms -- i just felt like wow -- i find so much inspiration from them. charlie: what do we need to do to minimize this kind of thing. good intelligence is one aspect. commissioner davis: we need to shut down those websites and the fbi has done an incredible job of doing that. we need to stay on top of this and truly we need to connect with people in the communities. when need to know the muslim community where this is bubbling up and we don't have to be intelligence gathering, we need to form relationships. dzhokhar tsarnaev was thrown out of the mosque a couple of weeks before this incident. if someone in the mosque had
told us about that, that would have reinvigorated the investigation the fbi had. that is the answer, making sure our officers are doing community policing. charlie: this is a scene between mark's character advocating the fbi release photos of the suspects. >> those are not our guys. you guys are not any closer to identifying the two we are looking for. we need you to releases pictures. ask if we release the photos now, we have zero control. >> if we overplay our hand, we may force these guys to react. >> boston is working against us. , what comes to terrorism, everybody wants to talk. you have a lot of people talking, but they are talking about the wrong people. photos, youase the have to start letting boston working for us.
>> i understand boston, but i can't just not my fingers. this decision goes all the way to the attorney general. >> then give me his number. i will call him. if you were going to make this film again, what would you do differently? : that's an interesting question. i'm happy with the film. there were so many people who played a critical role in these 150 hours from the time the bombs went off until a captured the younger brother in the boat. to have gonelike deeper. there's a young chinese-american carjacked by the two brothers morerguably was responsible in any one single person for not only capturing the brothers, but they were on their way to manhattan to blow up times square. courageng man had such and poise and intelligence for
that hour and a half while they were in the car and a took all weres money and they getting ready to leave and he knew there are going to kill him and come to manhattan and he planned the right moment for an escape. to do what he did took such incredible courage and i think the commissioner would agree he was very much a part of the capture. of people whomple did so much. if we had another hour, we could have filled up. -- filled it up. charlie: whenever you talk to people, they did -- they say i did what i had to do, i did my duty and all of that. what is it about the chemistry between the two of you? why do you work together so often? mark: i love him. i love them as a brother, i love him as a film maker. he was an actor first. he's extremely collaborative.
he pushes you and brings the best out of me and i hope i do the same for him. with these particular stories, .e care and it's not about us it's about the people we are honoring and making sure we get it right and hold everyone else to that standard. a remarkables story. it opens in new york and delay on december 21. boston as well. charlie: nationwide on january 13. ."atriots day we will be right back. stay with us. ♪
charlie: he is the former head hostvelopment at bravo and of "watch what happens live." his new book is a follow-up to diaries.he cohen it's called "superficial." i'm pleased to have you back at this table. out also prized about the reaction to the first book? .ndy: no i thought it was going to be great. i thought it was going to sell. interestings conversation about what is going on in people's lives and you wrote the hell out of it. -- and it is a
well written book. i loved warhol's diaries when they came out and that was what the first one was inspired by. what did you love about his diaries? andy: he took me places i've never would have been invited to. it's 11 years of globetrotting and openreally dishy my eyes to a world i wanted to live in. celebrityey world of and behind-the-scenes a late-night talkshow, producing the housewives and having a dog, it's agreat parents, well rounded situation. charlie: have you moved into this place where you have the same kind of thing going from one new york event to another?
andy: i think it's a deconstruction of celebrity culture from the vantage point of becoming a celebrity and dealing with celebrities and partying with them. it is all that. i found myself and i was like wait a minute, i'm getting invited to the stuff myself. let me start writing. charlie: when do you write? andy: i write every night. i either job down some notes or just get it all out. then i fill in the blanks on airplanes, which i'm on the lot and flesh things out. charlie: how much do you write? is it a string of consciousness? andy: i could write three little items. i could write nothing. charlie: and you don't edit much
? andy: i do edit. i -- this has been two years. i took out days altogether that were not interesting where things started to feel monotonous. the reader so that would be entertaining. wherewere moments personally, the folder ability i reveal in this book that i did andin the past about myself situations with other people that i may not have put in the last one. i was in such a group from writing that i wanted to keep going. if you are writing a follow-up and wanted to be better, bigger and more interesting. you describe it as deep and shallow. andy: much like me. i'm high and low. that's what worked when i was programming rosso. we could have top chef and
project runway which were our emmy-winning shows and mixes it with the house wives or other shows that are considered to give the viewer a different experience. i have a radio channel on serious programmed with music and we talk about pop culture to dan rather, talking about politics. charlie: when you look at yourself now, would you never want to give up the programming aspect of your life? you programmed bravo -- andy: i was a producer at cbs news for 10 years. i just reduced television for my entire career am a 26 years. i could never give up that. i'm a very active executive producer. does it simply give you an opportunity -- andy: i just couldn't dial back.
i just could not do it. what's the perfect program for you? andy: my show is perfect for me. it allows me to do everything i love. half-hourlly, fun product of my own imagination that has come to life for seven and a half years. if you wanted to do something in addition, what show is there on the air? would you do something like "good morning america?" the hours are a little freaky to me. i saw you yesterday morning. i love the idea of that because do that and i'm interested in a lot, but i would like to do a game show, believe it or not. charlie: have you looked into
that? have you tried to create one? andy: i will get one. watch. are machinations in the book and i'm going to host a new version of match game. it sounds stupid, but it's just fun to me. believe yourou life is so interesting that other people would be interested observationsy about others? andy: it's so egotistical to say my life is so interesting that people would be interested but i've now written three books about my life, so i've gotten over that. a lot of humor and self-deprecation. i call the book superficial. i'm trying to get ahead of it. about other's talk great adventures -- would you like to write a novel? andy: i was talking to dan
rather about this. he was working on one and found that every character talked like him. i was saying how hard that would be. it just seems difficult. i love nonfiction. and it is a imprint lot of nonfiction i'm developing. don't know why would be good at being a fiction writer. charlie: you are looking for nonfiction books and have some insight into people you know can tell a story. do you ask them to write the book or is it your reaction will come to you? andy: someone wrote a piece in the new york times that i really responded to. and there are people i've said have you ever thought about this? charlie: you are a one-man
conglomerate. andy: it depends on how you define conglomerate. who would you like to make a documentary about? andy: no one has done the definitive documentary -- you but onng to laugh -- diana ross. i would like to do one on diana ross. charlie: she used to live in my building. andy: i know that. i thought it was too stupid for me to say she was in the building -- she fascinates me for a variety of reasons. i think she'd changed things. if we talk about today, there would be no beyonce. she came from the projects. there was a lot of racial stuff. was a little bit of a thug when it she was in the supremes and i would like to get
into that. there is more to that story. charlie: you also do public speaking. andy: anderson cooper and i are on tour together. deepcalled deep shot -- talk and shallow tales. you can guess who the deep part of who the shallow part is. and anderson and i are for real, great reason we have a great time together. , andoked a date in boston the year and half later, the schedule is full up. would you do one a month? andy: we have about 20 on the books. we go out and we talk and we tell stories about our lives. we play very well off each other and it's about being on the front lines of celebrity and world events. is it you interviewing
him -- andy: the first part is me interviewing him, but it is a conversation. we bring video clips and open up to the audience. and i drink on stage. what do you drink? andy: i drink tequila. and fresca. charlie: what does he drink? andy: i pour him the same. it's the last 10 dates on the tour that i've got him to start drinking a little bit. he was a lightweight. we have friends who say to both of us you work too hard. you don't get enough sleep. judge me like you
are doing more and i sent judgment and i say you have to understand, i'm living my dream life. this is stuff i'm dying to be doing and if six of these things were taken away -- charlie: but you would say this , what could you be doing other than this that would be more fun? name it. andy: i totally agree. i'm from the seacrestian model. i like to do more. is any part of you only? andy: i have moments in the book i share where i come home from the show and i'm alone and i'm like wow, this isn't great. charlie: "superficial" best-selling offer -- test .elling author, andy cohen
♪ >> 25 points and more to come. the fed raises rates. a new security headache that yahoo! unidentified thieves steal data from one billion users. >> crown resorts abandoning their international spinoff, selling shares to pay their debts. >> and donald trump is in silicon valley. >> this is the second hour of "daybreak: