Modern field guide to security and privacy

State Department reverses course on cybersecurity exports

The State Department aims to renegotiate an international pact designed to limit exports of surveillance software – bowing to pressure from Obama administration officials and cybersecurity experts.

|
Reuters/File
A barbed-wire fence is seen in the foreground of containers on a cargo ship at a port in Tokyo.

After nearly 10 months of intense pressure from cybersecurity experts, the Obama administration will send the State Department to renegotiate a controversial arms control agreement meant to limit surveillance software exports.

The decision represents a turnabout for the State Department, which had resisted reopening talks with the 41 nations that are signatories of the Wassenaar Arrangement. But after widespread criticism that the trade pact would hamper the trade of legitimate security software, the US is aiming to return to the negotiating table.

"There is simply no way to interpret the plain language of the text in a way that does not sweep up a multitude of important security products," said Rep. Jim Langevin (D) of Rhode Island in a statement. "The Administration is staking out a clear position that the underlying text must be changed."

Representative Langevin says National Security Advisor Rice also became a strong factor in swaying Foggy Bottom to renegotiate the deal. Obama administration officials unanimously called for a new agreement at a meeting last week.

The controversy around Wassenaar began heating up last May when the Department of Commerce released proposed export regulations based on the pact's terms. Experts feared the broad language in the proposed rules would even ban some cybersecurity researchers in the US from jointly conducting security work abroad.

In addition to cybersecurity experts, US lawmakers and Department of Homeland Security officials also worried that Wassenaar's language could limit threat information-sharing initiatives and damage domestic security.

At a congressional hearing in January, the State Department publicly opposed renegotiating Wassenaar – citing the difficulty of signing another deal with the 31 countries that had already adopted the terms. Instead, the agency had hoped to satisfy critics by creating exemptions in the trade restrictions.

But those claims were met with Congressional skepticism. Soon after the hearing, however, State Department officials reached out to industry experts to work on a new proposal. 

"The [House Oversight] hearing hammered home the national security implications of the Wassenaar language," said Katie Moussouris, the chief policy officer of the bug bounty firm HackerOne.

A vocal critic of the regulations, Ms. Moussouris was one of the industry experts called in to work on the new proposal. She says the new draft language shifts the focus of the Wassenaar guidelines with a narrower focus on surveillance software itself.

Moussouris cautions that the State Department’s evolving position on cybersecurity exports does not mean the issue is closed. Other nations will still have to agree to change.

"We’ll consider the issue settled when we see it settled," she said.

 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to State Department reverses course on cybersecurity exports
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Passcode/2016/0302/State-Department-reverses-course-on-cybersecurity-exports
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe