Skip to main content

tv   Cyber Command Energy Dept. Confirmations  CSPAN  March 3, 2018 4:59am-6:54am EST

4:59 am
c-span where history unfolds daily. in 1979 c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. and today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. next the confirmation hearing for lieutenant general paul nakasone. this senate armed services committee hearing is just under two hours.
5:00 am
commander of the u.s. cyber command and director of the national security agency and chief of the central security service. that's quite a bit of stuff there thank you for joining us this morning. also at the appropriate time i
5:01 am
invite you to introduce your family, which i've already had the honor of meeting. it's standard procedure and it's a requirement of this committee to have certain questions. i would like to ask one, two, three -- eight -- seven questions. if you just vocally come out yes or no. have you adhere to laws and regulations governing conflicts of interest. >> yes. >> there you ensure your staff complies with deadlines established for requested communications including questions for the record of hearings. >> yes. >> will you cooperate and providing witnesses in response to the congressional requests? >> yes. >> those witnesses be protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings? >> yes. >> do you agree, if confirmed, to testify upon request before this committee? >> yes. >> do you agree to provide documents including copies of electronic forms of communication in a timely manner
5:02 am
when requested by a duly constituted committee or consult with the committee regarding a basis of any good faith delay or denial in providing such documents? >> yes. >> okay. lastly, have you assumed any duties or undertaking of any actions which would appear to presume the outcome of the confirmation process? all right, general, if confirmed, you'll become the first commander of the u.s. cyber command as a unified combat and command. creating the unified command is an important step but much work remains for you to do, especially with regard to centralizing the responsibilities currently spread across three different agencies. we have dod and fbi and you have
5:03 am
dhs. another one of your top priorities, if confirmed is ensuring cyber command readiness. if the services do not deliver the required tools, capabilities, and personnel, we're in danger of a hollow cyber force. two days ago, admiral rogers was repeatedly questioned by this committee on the role of cyber command and specifically his command's response to the russian disinformation campaign around our 2016 presidential elections. unfortunately, the partisan propensity to discredit our president consumed over half of that hearing and hopefully that's not going to happen again today. and it would be a disservice in two ways. first, it assumes that cyber command action would be the only response to the russian
5:04 am
disinformation campaign when in reality it should be a whole government approach. especially given the disinformation is just part of the threat that russia poses to the united states. if confirmed, would be your responsibility to provide insight and recommendations to policy makers of the government approach. would you respond to these attempts? secondly, perhaps more problematic for the committee's role today it neglects the full scope of the u.s. cyber command. the stated missions of the cyber command is to defend the homeland, defend military computer networks, and develop and employ military cyber capabilities. that is a robust task and the committee should ensure that general nakasone is fully vetted on all aspects of that command.
5:05 am
the national defense strategy makes it clear that renewed great power of competition with russia and china leaves every do main, including cyber contested without coeshs across the entire government. that would remain a significant disadvantage. by the way, we had three of the senators with me over the past 13 or 14 days. actually, looking into this. we are in the area of the south china sea. we had a growing threat from china and some things we were not aware of prior to going there. dr. park, you've been nominated to oversee the nnnsa submission and to detect, secure, and expose of dangerous ra raid log
5:06 am
material. develop technologies to detect nuclear and radio active proliferation worldwide, and to collaborate internationally to ensure and secure the safe expansion of a nuclear energy. and, miss white, if confirmed you'll be responsible for the clean up of nuclear waste. unfortunately the environmental office of d.o.e. has been plagued with rejected management issues, safety concerns, and continuous technical challenges. so you've got your work cut out for you there. senator reed? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to welcome the witnesses and congratulate them for their service already and for the willingness to serve at the department of defense and other agencies. and i would like to recognize your families. they're such an important part of your contribution to the nation. thank you. general, you serve as commander
5:07 am
of cyber commands on the army cyber command which targets isis. in addition to your extensive experience, intelligence making a highly qualified individual to serve. if confirmed, the challenges you'll face include disrupting and exposing cyber mission operations conducted by russians and other countries as admiral rogers pointed out. the russians are conducting these operations as we speak. and we have to do something. working with other stakeholders, you have to develop whole d.o.d. and whole government approaches to cyber. in establishing the insurance policy capabilities that will in time help to prevent warfare attacks against the united states, these are no small tasks but more important now than ever that these threats to our national security are confronted head on. dr. park, you're nominated to be the administrator for defense of
5:08 am
nonproliferation. the primary role in a national nuclear agency. this committee will look to you for the point guard. capable of doing so while assisting the international atomic agency with the ability with monitoring are. it remains vital to maintaining national security and global stability, if confirmed we ask you to give us your assessment on nuclear proliferation concerns in the middle east, north korea, and around the world. miss white, you're nominated to serve for environmental management. if confirmed it would be your responsibility to oversee the large and complex clean up operations while. since the clean up program began more than 35 years ago, the majority of the sites have been completed. current clean up operations
5:09 am
require more care due to the complexity. these include sites like hanifin, washington that has some 55 gallons and 177 underground tanks and loss al moss, texas. you will be challenged to complete these projects quickly and efficiently under the tight budget constraints required by your obligation to serve as a taxpayer dollars. if kwon firmed, we will look to you to give us regular updates on the progress on these issues, but ensuring you have clear lines of communication that stays with the operations take place. i would like to thank the nominees for your willingness to serve. and thank you very much for your service. thank you. >> thank you, senator reed. we're going to have opening statements. we're going to try to confine them as close as you can to five minutes. your entire statement will be made a part of the record. and we will count the time against you as you introduce
5:10 am
your teams. we'll start with general. >> senator, ranking member read, and members of the committee. i'm honored to appear before you today regarding my nomination as commander of u.s. cyber command, director of national security agency, chief central security service. i want to thank president trump, secretary mattis, and general dun ford for their confidence in nominating me for these important positions. let me also thank my wife susan for being here. i owe much of my success. >> raise your hand so we know who you are. >> nearly 25 years of marriage, 19 moves, and numerous deployments. susan and i are also joined today by our children, sara, david, and joseph. our son daniel, our eldest son is in college today taking his midterms. we are exceptionally proud of all of them. i want to thank admiral mike rogers for his 36 years of
5:11 am
commissioned service to our nation. admiral rogers lead cyber during a time of incredible transformation and rapid growth. i thank him and his wife dana for all they have done in service to our nation. for the past ten years, i've the privilege to lead, plan, and execute joint and army cyber organizations. i've seen growth in the cyber capacity and capabilities within the department of defense. from the stand up our cyber mission force to the daily operation conducted by joint task force. we're rapidly maturing our cyber forces. when i first started working cyber operations, these operations were often just concepts. and when conducted performed ad hoc by technical specialists on loan from other organizations. today this is not the case. now i'm a mature and highly capable cyber force in the fight conducting daily operations against adversaries, and
5:12 am
strengthening the combat power of u.s. forces around the world. the swift growth represents tremendous opportunity. if confirmed, i plan to continue this impressive progress. but i've also seen cyber threats to our nation grow exponentially and adapt as quickly from adversaries conducting exploitation of the network to social media platforms to fake news. they face significant challenges. these challenges have taught me several important lesssons over last decade. first, operating and defending our networks is a mission second, i've learned we need to impose cost on the adversaries to ensure success. aye i've learned it's a team
5:13 am
effort. the fourth and most important of these corner stones i've learned while technology drives change in cyberspace, it's the people. the soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines along with our civilians who guarantee our success. e recognize that cyber command in the national security agency are two unique and vital organizations through identities, authorities, and oversight mechanisms. i'm committed to leading both with vision, drive, and purpose for the future. cyberspace is dynamic and adaptive approaches are always needed to solve the new challenges constantly emerging. finally, i sit before you today with the understanding that we're at a defining time for our nation and our military.
5:14 am
near peer competitors are posturing themselves and threats to the united states global advantage are growing. nowhere is this challenge more evident than in cyberspace. with this in mind, if confirmed on the u.s. cyber command in the national security agency, i'll ensure our military commanders can call upon aggressive and globally dominant cyber force with the capability and capacity to defend us at home and apply pressure on our adversaries abroad. in closing, i'm deeply honored to be considered for the leadership positions. if confirmed, i look forward to working with the committee and the entire congress to ensure we leverage our opportunities and also address our challenges. senator inhofe, thank you for the opportunity to be here this morning. i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you. dr. park. >> gentlemen, it's a tremendous privilege to appear before you
5:15 am
today. i'm honored to have this opportunity to serve my country and which to thank president trump for having placed their confidence in my ability to lead the nsa's office. mr. chairman and the members of the committee, if you'll permit me, i'll introduce my family. my wife of 23 years. and my two daughters. and my parents in nevada and, finally, i would like to thank my close friends and colleagues for their support and good counsel during the confirmation process. mr. chairman, the united states has long been a leader in the global effort to combat nuclear proliferation. that's is the least of those efforts securing nuclear around the world with international
5:16 am
partnerships. if confirmed my top priority is is continue executing the crucial nation supporting the president's objectives of maintaining a balance between the promotion of the legitimate nuclear commerce and controlling the spread of weapons to usual material, equipment, technology, and expertise. if confirmed maintain the core competency will be one of my highest priorities. a significant portion of nsa work force especially scientists, engineers, and technicians are approaching retirement in the next five
5:17 am
yea years. for more than 20 years, my professional life has been dedicated to the nuclear enterprise. i lead and managed the complex programs and formulated transformational r & d. my work has included collaboration with the yes national defense, homeland security, and intelligence communities in the implication of domestic knowledge and national security requirements. as the director of the nsa, i lead efforts to advance and field in technologies in support of counter terrorism and response for the nation.
5:18 am
if confirmed it would be the highest honor of my career. should i be confirmed, i'll work tirelessly with our counter parts to ensure that the united states continues to lead in the global efforts to combat nuclear proliferation and terrorism. again, i thank you for inviting me to appear before the committee today. i'm prepared to answer any questions. >> members of the committee, and professional committee staff. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you as the president's nominee to the assistant secretary of energy
5:19 am
for environmental management at the department of energy. my warmest thanks to your respective style for taking the time to share the issues of concern regarding environmental management and for outlining expectations of me in the role of em 1. a role that involves fulfilling our moral obligation to provide a cleaner, safer, healthy environment by having a clear plan of action to address our nation's environmental legacy challenges from world war ii and the cold war. i'm honored to appear before the committee and thank president trump and secretary perry for displaying their confidence in me through nomination to this important position. should the united states senate honor me with its confirmation, i look forward to working together with you and your staff to resolve the demanding issues that confront the nation by safely reducing environmental and cost risk and delivering meaningful results that protect the u.s. taxpayer.
5:20 am
i would like to introduce scott anderson to the committee. scott is my best friend, strongest advocate, and greatest supporter. i also thank my close friends and colleagues for being here today. my master's degree is in nuclear engineering and i was fortune enough to have graduated at a time when the environmental field was ceiltively new and ripe with opportunities for innovation and development. with my degree, a creative and curious mind set and appreciation for our environment i determined the nuclear clean up field was a good fit for me. i began my career performing physical clean up work in the field. my strategy was to learn the environmental business bottom up rather than top down. this has been instrumental in developing my understanding from multiple advantage points of the complex challenges facing the department in the environmental management mission.
5:21 am
it is important to note this work is not without some level of risk. the women and men in the field implementing plans and delivering projects are primary importance at the em sites. without these individuals in the fields address dressing out in protective gear, there would be no clean up and no risk reduction. maintaining and further building trust with the work force we rely on to address our nation's environmental legacy challenges will be of focus throughout my tenure. my early career experience was informative and provided a sound basis to help me or my consulting firm. since founding my firm, working within the commercial and government nuclear industry and the mentoring from well respected industry experts have helped me grow into an experienced leader and innovative problem solver. for the past 25 years, i
5:22 am
consulted with commercial government, and international organizations solving complex problems here at home and abroad. i've worked at a number of the em site the providing me with direct experience addressing the difficult technical and stakeholder issues and department faces while driving forward the clean up mission. through the years, i've had the good fortune of work and collaborate with a wonderful group of smart, technically savvy peers to cost effectively solve seemingly attractive problems. this was done through team work, innovation, ingenuity, and opt myzation. over the course of my career, i've been able to work on, visit, and understand some of the world's great nuclear environmental challenges. therefore, i consider this potential key leadership position at d.o.e.m to be an opportunity to maximize my private sector experience and knowledge to assist the department in mitigating risks and working toward eliminating
5:23 am
existing environmental liabilities. should i be confirmed, accountability to safely meet responsibilities, commits, and milestones will start with me. i'll further expect federal staff to deliver results that will protect the investments made by the hard working american taxpayers. i further commit to you i will communicate and work closely with this committee, the staff within the department, congress, native american tribes, regulators, local communities, and the dedicated site work force that will set priorities that will have lasting impact on the overall em program. senator inhofe, ranking member reed, and members of the committee, thank you, again, for this opportunity to appear before you as the president's nominee for assistant secretary of energy for environmental management. i look forward to answering your questions as you consider my
5:24 am
nomination. >> thank you. >> we have votes coming up at 11: 45. probably about noon we'll try to finish this hearing. and then, also, some people will be leaving. both democrats and republicans for a short time because we're also meeting with another committee at the same time. including myself. so this will be a little bit of an in and out. we'll have five minute rounds. that okay? all right. the commission of cyber command is to defend homeland, defending computer networks, and employing military cyber capability. as the combatant commander you're an operational command that has got to operate within the authorities that you're given. you are not responsible for developing cyber policy but are responsible for executing the
5:25 am
established policy. russia used online media as it was called to our attention to try to influence and degrade our election process in 2016. which has nothing to do with you, but i have a request to ask you. two days ago admiral radiologiers was asked multiple times about who is responsible and what our response should be to another attack by russia on our elections. there's a lot of operations we can do and respond. if this happened again, if you walk us through how the government could respond to this and what your role would be in that decision making process. what your role would be. use your mike. >> senator, thank you. in terms of my responsibility, my role if confirmed, that is to provide a series of options to
5:26 am
our civilian leadership for their determination whether or not actions would be taken against an adversary. in this case, the case that you laid out, the ultimate response, obviously, resides with the president for that decision. and congress. but in terms of response and a responsible for our critical infrastructure at this time, the process rests with the department of homeland security. it could come from a number of capabilities that our nation provides. >> thank you. admiral rogers, two days ago he was testifying and said this is a quote. he said we're not where we need to be with respect to the structure and organization of the whole government approach to cyber attacks on the homeland.
5:27 am
now we talked about this before and you've been addressing this with the fbi, dhs web and dod. do you have any ideas you looked at this on improvements we can make structurally in this process? >> senator, when i look at the structure that is laid out today and the role of dod. the federal bureau of investigation and didn't of homeland security. each with the unique norths and unique capabilities. i'm struck that what we must do with this structure is improve the cross talk, the coordination, the sharing that goes on. if you consider today that 90% of our networks are within the private sector, that private sector is likely to be the first indicator of some type of intrusion or attack. the importance of being able to share that information rapidly among all three players to
5:28 am
ensure that we understand what is going on and being able to address it is paramount. i come back to this very close coordination that must be improved as we look at the three different elements. >> okay. and i wouldn't expect you to come up with the results because it's ban problem that has been there since we established the program. dr. park, i want to address and get a comment from you having to do with the iran deal that was made under the obama administration. several of the most important provisions to deter the regime from becoming a nuclear state contain sunset causes set to expire in just a few years. dr. park, how can the u.s. mitigate proliferation potential in iran after these provisions expire in a few years. any ideas on that? >> senator, it requires, you
5:29 am
know, national park working closely with the iaea to make sure whatever they do in terms of operating nuclear reactors are strictly monitored and we are -- we have been developing, in fact, advancing proliferation detection systems out of the office of r & d. we'll work closely with the stakeholders to make sure they comply with the rules and regulations. what can you expect where the progress can be made? it's one of the most significant and expensive sites. >> it is very complex. there's numerous challenges
5:30 am
there from some of the waste management issues. and one thing i would like to consider when i'm looking at these problems is that there's a long time scale involved in all things nuclear. so we need to make sure that we make decisions that are timely. they are technically underpinned and cost underpinned. that's the kind of decision making i would be applying to not only han ford but all of our great environmental challenges we face across the complex. >> thank you very much. >> general, the marshall defense science board task force defense science board task force made recommendations to develop campaign plans essentially to go after deterrence or prepared to go after key assets of our proponents such as the wealth.
5:31 am
do you agree with the recommendations? >> i agree with the recommendations. i thought the defense science board as they laid out both what we should hold at risk but also the idea of resilience and the continuing challenges of attribution are three critical points i think come together are we preparing such plans? detailed campaign plans with respect to the potential issues? >> yes. >> okay.
5:32 am
in terms of the critical infrastructure. so much is held. and there is variable degrees of attention paid by the private sector to the cyber issues. you're not the leading agency. that's the department of homeland security. you're participating in the government approach to this. are we getting our act together quickly enough to face the potential threats? >> so, senator, my current
5:33 am
responsibility as commander army cyber. i don't have a robust as picture as i need to. and certainly if confirmed that's one of the things i would look at. i would offer as a general statement. i'm never satisfied with defense of anything. we have to take a hard look every day. >> thank you, sir. at present nuclear destruction. we learned that and discovered that the iraqis are using this civilian program to actually develop nuclear weapons. they call it the gold standard. we have engaged in transfer of technology to the emirates, in particular. they adhere to the gold standard. do you believe that saudi arabia should adhere to additional
5:34 am
protocols? >> in any of the nuclear technology transfer, we need to achieve the highest standards when it comes to a nonproliferation from both countries. we need to be realistic and practical to provide leadership in overseeing some of these operations. and it becomes there are other countries. that. can provide a similar technology to saudi arabia or other countries that make insourcing the nuclear reactor, for example. striking the balance is critical. and that's the only way can provide assert our leadership and the united states and allies and partners. >> but it strikes me that the em ratties who are close colleagues in everything we do in the middle east.
5:35 am
they adhere to the protocol a.m. why should we make the same insistence. if we don't, we're lowering the threshold. even if it's symbolically lower. >> senator, from the technology standpoint, we are actually improving what we can do to monitor. to clearly verify they're complying. in terms of the negotiation details, i don't have any details at this point in time. >> congratulations. and your families. i know it's not easy on the families. i want to thank the families, as well. i appreciate your desire to serve our nation and these important positions. general, i want to start with you. you know, we've had a number of hearings on this committee on cyber strategy.
5:36 am
or the lack thereof. i think it's probably the more pertinent issue. civilians or military. it's been common knowledge and open hearings, by the way that our adversaries who use stieber attacks against us clearly see that the benefits much doing these kind of attacks outweigh the costs. meaning that pretty broad consensus that we haven't retaliated hardly at all. whether it's iran, north korea, russia, china. we had a hearing last year eeshl a year and a half ago. general clapper was on his way out as dni. he publicly stated in an open hearing that the chinese attack on the office of personnel management, which when they stole $22 million files, i'm sure they stole yours and mine
5:37 am
and others. i asked if we retaliated against china. he said no. can you give me your thoughts. we seem to be the cyber punching bag of the world, and it's common knowledge. we have officials who have come before this committee in an open session saying, nope. we get hit and don't retaliate. what is your thought on that? should we start cranking it up? >> i offer three thoughts. the first thought, is a strategy, a doctrine critical for us to be able to set the framework. not only for how we operate, but also as message to our adversaries, as well. >> do you think we have that now?
5:38 am
what do you think our adversaries think now? >> basically, i would say right now they do not think much will happen. >> they don't fear us. >> they don't fear us. >> is that good? >> that's not good. >> will you work to change that? >> if confirmed and as the policy worked, i would provide input as an operational commander. to my second point -- >> i think you have broad base on this committee. republicans and democrats, if you said that. if that was part of your strategy. >> what i would offer is that right now is this phase develops. cyberspace develops, the longer that we have inactivity. the longer our adversaries are able to establish their own norms. i think that is very important that we realize that. and then the final piece i would offer we should think of
5:39 am
cyberspace not necessarily as only being a cyber response. we have tremendous capabilities in our nation being able to level those capabilities is something we should think about. >> maybe that's overt. maybe that covert. i would agree with you on that. as you know, the interagency cooperation with regard to this mission, which is probably when you think about it, at least from my perspective, the most important mission that our u.s. military and interagency federal
5:40 am
officials undertake. do you think we have enough interagency cooperation within the counter wmd mission. d.o.e. obviously plays an important role. given the recent news in north korea was able to proliferate chemical weapons, technology and chemical weapons to syria. does it concern you that the north koreans will use these same proliferation networks to potentially proliferate nuclear materials in technology?
5:41 am
played a critical role in equipping other departments with the latest technologies. and all though it's not directly -- it's not brought to my offense. it would be, nsa there's counter terrorism office and it does fantastic job in terms of coordinating, sharing experiences. there is numerous exercises we undertake to make sure that responders are trained. yes, he improve. yes, we need more support.
5:42 am
>> thank you. i appreciate the opportunity to talk at length in some of these issues in my office. i appreciate that attention. if confirmed i look forward to continuing to work closely with you on some of the things we talked about. one issue in particular that we had a chance to talk about were some of the recruiting challenges for cyber professionals and also the need to make sure that if we're dealing with a whole government approach that all federal agencies have the ability to have top tier cyber professionals. we talked about a possibility of having a joint duty program. similar to the joint forces in the military where different branchs have an opportunity to see how the different branchs work. so we don't have silos between
5:43 am
different military services. the same could occur for the civili civilian force as well. i'm involved in antonymous vehicles. that's critical infrastructure as these cars will be interconnected and have expertise to the department of transportation that may not have been at that level in the past. certainly they could learn a great deal from interacting with military services in your command in particular. if you could talk about how joint service program might work. how that is something that might add to our ability to have people kind of cross pollinating great ideas they can bring back to the respective agencies. a lot of times we think of schedule. what underpins technology is the talent. you hit the point in terms of being able to cross pollinate the talent.
5:44 am
the ability to go to other places to serve, to learn, to be able to experience this is very important to us. so as we look across interagencies, as we look to bring greater partnerships among our agencies, i think joint duty programs would be an area we certainly could explore based on the benefits to both organizations. >> i appreciate that. and we also talked about how we would how you are interested in bringing highly skilled individuals into the military. perhaps at a direct commission. at a higher rank. there's a pilot program that is going forward that you have been involved with. could you give us a sense how that is going and do you need any additional support from congress to expand direct commissioning programs that bring in highly trained cyber professionals at higher rank? >> let me first begin with the thank you to the committee for all of the work that has been done to provide a number of different programs. you hit on the direct
5:45 am
commissioning program. i was struck by a talk you did in 2016 you discussed a highly successful army recruiting commercial you termed a bread crumb. you challenged folks to solve a problem. would you talk about that. is that something you think we should expand? >> so a credit goes to army recruiting agencies that have done this. our idea was let's it appeal to
5:46 am
the young people in a way they know they should be experiencing what life is like for us. we hid a code until the commercial. it allowed you to log on to a site and try to solve a puzzle. we've had over 8 million people try to solve this puzzle. less than 100,000 have been able to do it. that's the type of talent we're looking for. that's the type of originality. that's the type of action we think will attract the best and brightest to be part of our greater department of defense and the national service. >> thank you. a question related to research and development of technologies that will give us breakthroughs in order to better identify potential violations of treaties. i'm thinking of the jcpoa in particular. it allow the the iaea to use modern technologies. it's a fairly opened concept. over the next few years there
5:47 am
could be tremendous advances in our ability to detect potential violations. my question is do you agree they have a role in pushing for breakthroughs and what sort of priority would you place on that, if confirmed? >> senator, nsa has been pushing the envelope on getting the latest technologies into the sensors we use for proliferation detection. we work closely with the military branchs and ic members. i appreciate your support in the r & d area. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. congratulations to you all. thank you for your willingness
5:48 am
to serve. general, you know i'm a big fan of yours and our country is blessed to have you in the role. it's not a hostile question to you but your exchange with senator sullivan. we're four years -- 31 years into cyber war. we're four years into regular attacks against the united states to which we publicly admit we don't respond. we don't respond in any way that is sufficient to change behavior. your exchange with senator sullivan is the most important thing that will happen on capitol hill today. we have hundreds of hearings around here. 80% are fake. 90% are pointless. lots of questions that we ask and they all seem like they're equal because they're questions and they go on and on and senators pontificate. what you just said was that you agreed with admiral rogers. admiral rogers said russia has not received any response from the u.s. to change their behavior. do you agree? >> it's not changed their
5:49 am
behavior. >> and three years ago, at the lpm hack we had obama intelligence chiefs up here, before the homeland security committee and asked them the same questions. they said absolutely not do you think there's any reason that the chinese should be worried? >> again, i think that our adversaries have not seen our response in sufficient detail to change their behavior. >> so this is ultimately not the responsibility of uniformed military to bear the brunt of the hopefully rightful anger of the american people but their government is failing them. at the top of the legislative and executive we're not responding in any way that is adequate to the challenge we face. we're playing cyber defense. we have a threat against us. we're the biggest, most advanced economy in the world. we have the most electronics and 90 percent of our critical infrastructure is in the private sector. we stand to absorb attack after
5:50 am
attack unless we had offensive cyber capabilities. we have the capabilities. the problem is not technical. if we had the will and strategy and adjacent to cyber response, a since diplomatic tools and kinetic responses were all on the table. why should the american people have any confidence in their government right now in the area of cyber war? >> so, again, senator, i would offer from my comments previously. we have to think of this broadly. how will we respond in it's not necessarily always within the military or cyber realm we're going to do. but offering a response in terms of being able to an adversary to determine it's a behavior we don't accept as important. >> and can you give, again, let's distinguish among three groups that have cop ability here. we need a technically trained work force able to respond and
5:51 am
leadership to lay out a menu of options. but the top of the executive branch and legislature that is possible for oversight is where the people should be angry at us. if you were go to assess blame now don't put it on the legislature because somebody else will ask you a hard question but clearly the oversight in the body is woefully inadequate. at the top of the dod world and at the handoff to civilian leadership, what is the conversation look like now where a menu of options is presented and then what happens next. i couldn't give you an informed response. what i think has to happen if confirmed i provide a series of cyber and military options a is considered by the secretary of defense and ultimate the
5:52 am
president. i think we have to determine the best way forward. what fits within our national strategy and act on that, senator. >> i'm at time. i want to reiterate our country is blessed to have you in the new role. you'll clearly be con officialed. lots of people around here, including me, have great confidence in you. i hope we feel the surge si and response.
5:53 am
>> great statement, senator. >> i'll start by asking you the same two questions i asked nominees to all the committees in which i serve. have you commit mid verbal or physical harassment or assault over sexual nature? >> no. >> no. >> no. >> same question have you faced discipline or entered into a settlement related into this kind of conduct? >> no. >> no. >> no. >> thank you. general, admiral rogers of cyber command testified before the committee earlier this week that the responsibility for preventing ongoing russian interference with our upcoming
5:54 am
elections lies with the department of homeland security. not with cyber command. do you agree? it falls within the system of the department of homeland security. >> what institutes a electoral system is so if the main responsibility lies with the homeland security and all of the components relating to elections
5:55 am
then. my understanding it begins with the states who have overall responsibility for their electoral process and falls within dhs as the overall critical infrastructure lead for the area. >> in your view, the department of homeland secure city the appropriate department to ask questions about what they are doing to prevent the continuing russian attacks? of all the departments that we could ask that question of. certainly they have the lead. nonresponse to various cyber attacks. and particularly the state sponsored cyber attacks. where does the responsibility lie to develop a whole government strategy to respond to cyber attacks. particularly state sponsored cyber attacks. >> so an overall strategy, senator, would emanate from the
5:56 am
executive branch. in erms it of what the department of defense would do. obviously is planned for certain responses and if directed conduct those activities. >> so when you say the executive branch, do you mean the president of the united states should be the person convenes all of you to develop the government strategy as to how to respond to these ongoing cyber attacks? particularly the state sponsored cyber attacks. >> obviously the national security counsel would be the lead that would do that today. do you know if that's happening now. they're taking the lead to develop a strategy. >> my current responsibility it's not something that i'm aware of today. if confirmed, something i would lean into. >> that's good.
5:57 am
what is the number one on your list of priorities for cyber to accomplish under your leadership. if begins with readiness. it's approaching the full bill. so we have to be able to measure the readiness. can they do their mission. are their personnel, equipment, training right they can continue to do the missions in the future. i think the readiness element is the number one priority i would look at, senator. i want to follow up. this is productive. you have at lot of retirements happening in. so i really am concerned about how you're going to ensure you get the right kind of people. particularly dr. park.
5:58 am
will you make a recommendation about that possibility of splitting nsa and cyber command? or is that something you have an
5:59 am
opinion on? >> what is best for the nation. i think that's critical for us to consider. is it best for the nation that the national security agency and u.s. cyber command stay together under one leader. or is it a time now we think about a separate national security agency and separate combat and command. the congress has laid out a series of conditions upon which the secretary of defense and the chairman must attest to. if confirmed among the early things i would do is make that assessment and in the first 90 days provide that to the secretary of defense for his consideration and the director of national intelligence. >> thank you, sir. >> let's talk about with regard to the first 90 days. at some point in the classified environment, i would personally like to see the committee have you come back and talk about the menu of options you'll provide
6:00 am
to the president once you get to the point. the potential menu of options for deterrence in for measured response. one of the questions we have right now before admiral rogers was here earlier and that is the definition of an active war. and cyberspace i'm not comfortable that we have today a clear understanding of what institutes an act of war.
6:01 am
6:02 am
6:03 am
6:04 am
6:05 am
6:06 am
6:07 am
6:08 am
6:09 am
6:10 am
6:11 am
6:12 am
6:13 am
6:14 am
6:15 am
6:16 am
6:17 am
6:18 am
6:19 am
6:20 am
6:21 am
6:22 am
6:23 am
6:24 am
6:25 am
6:26 am
6:27 am
6:28 am
6:29 am
6:30 am
6:31 am
6:32 am
6:33 am
6:34 am
6:35 am
6:36 am
6:37 am
6:38 am
6:39 am
6:40 am
6:41 am
6:42 am
6:43 am
6:44 am
6:45 am
6:46 am
6:47 am
6:48 am
6:49 am
6:50 am
6:51 am
6:52 am
6:53 am


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on