January 21, 2015
Cybersecurity Issues and Challenges
successful attack with high impact can pose a larger risk
than a common successful attack with low impact.
Information and communications technology (ICT) is
ubiquitous and increasingly integral to almost every facet of
modern society. ICT devices and components are generally
interdependent, and disruption of one may affect many
others. Over the past several years, experts and
policymakers have expressed increasing concerns about
protecting ICT systems from cyberattacks.
The risks associated with any attack depends on three
factors: threats (who is attacking), vulnerabilities (how they
are attacking), and impacts (what the attack does).
Reducing the risks from cyberattacks usually involves (1)
removing the threat source, e.g., by closing down botnets or
reducing incentives for cybercriminals; (2) addressing
vulnerabilities by hardening ICT assets, e.g., by patching
software and training employees; and (3) lessening impacts
by mitigating damage and restoring functions, e.g., by
having back-up resources available for continuity of
operations in response to an attack.
What are the threats? People who perform cyberattacks
generally fall into one or more of five categories: criminals
intent on monetary gain from crimes such as theft or
extortion; spies intent on stealing classified or proprietary
information used by government or private entities; nationstate warriors who develop capabilities and undertake
cyberattacks in support of a country’s strategic objectives;
“hacktivists” who perform cyberattacks for nonmonetary
reasons; and terrorists who engage in cyberattacks as a
form of non-state or state-sponsored warfare.
The federal role in cybersecurity involves both securing
federal systems and assisting in protecting nonfederal
systems. Under current law, all federal agencies have
cybersecurity responsibilities relating to their own systems,
and many have sector-specific responsibilities for CI. More
than 50 statutes address various aspects of cybersecurity,
and new legislation has been debated since at least the 111th
Congress. However, until the end of the 113th Congress, no
bills on cybersecurity had been enacted since the Federal
Information Security Management Act (FISMA) in 2002.
What are the vulnerabilities? Cybersecurity is in many
ways an arms race between attackers and defenders. ICT
systems are very complex, and attackers are constantly
probing for weaknesses, which can occur at many points.
Defenders can often protect against weaknesses, but three
are particularly challenging: inadvertent or intentional acts
by insiders with access to a system; supply chain
vulnerabilities, which can permit the insertion of malicious
software or hardware during the acquisition process; and
previously unknown, or zero-day, vulnerabilities with no
Figure 1. Federal Agency Roles in Cybersecurity
What are the impacts? A successful attack can
compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability
of an ICT system and the information it handles. Cybertheft
or cyberespionage can result in exfiltration of financial,
proprietary, or personal information from which the
attacker can benefit, often without the knowledge of the
victim. Denial-of-service attacks can slow or prevent
legitimate users from accessing a system. Botnet malware
can give an attacker command of a system for use in
cyberattacks on other systems. Attacks on industrial control
systems can result in the destruction of the equipment they
control, such as generators, pumps, and centrifuges.
Most cyberattacks have limited impacts, but a successful
attack on some components of critical infrastructure (CI)—
most of which is held by the private sector—could have
significant effects on national security, the economy, and
the livelihood and safety of individual citizens. Thus, a rare
Notes: DHS: Department of Homeland Security; DOD: Department
of Defense; DOJ: Department of Justice; IC: Intelligence Community;
NIST: National Institute of Standards and Technology; NSA: National
Security Agency; NSS: National Security Systems; OMB: Office of
Management and Budget; R&D: Research and development.
www.crs.gov | 7-5700
Cybersecurity Issues and Challenges
Figure 1 is a simplified schematic diagram of major agency
responsibilities in cybersecurity. In general, NIST develops
FISMA standards that apply to federal civilian ICT, and
OMB is responsible for overseeing their implementation.
DOD is responsible for military cyberdefense and, through
NSA, security of NSS, which handle classified information.
NSA is also part of the IC. DHS has operational
responsibility for protection of federal civilian systems and
is the lead agency coordinating federal efforts assisting the
private sector in protecting CI assets under their control.
DOJ is the lead agency for enforcement of relevant laws.
What Does the Cybersecurity Executive Order Do? In
February 2013, the White House issued Executive Order
13636 and Presidential Policy Directive 21 to address CI
cybersecurity through voluntary public/private sector
collaboration and use of existing regulatory authorities.
Among other things, the documents expanded an existing
DHS information-sharing program and required NIST to
lead public/private development of a Cybersecurity
Framework of standards and best practices for protecting
CI. Released in February 2014, the Framework received
positive reviews, but it appears too early to determine the
extent to which it will improve CI cybersecurity.
Since the 111th Congress, more than 200 bills have been
introduced that would address cybersecurity issues. The
main issues addressed by such bills have been
Information Sharing—easing access of the private
sector to classified threat information and removing
barriers to sharing within the private sector and with
the federal government. Controversies: Roles of DHS
and the IC, impacts on privacy and civil liberties, and
risks of misuse by the federal government or the
FISMA Reform—updating the 2002 law to reflect
changes in ICT and the threat landscape.
Controversies: Role of DHS, OMB, and Commerce,
and flexibility of requirements.
R&D—updating agency authorizations and strategic
planning requirements. Controversies: Agency roles,
topics for R&D, and levels of funding.
Workforce—improving the size, skills, and
preparation of the federal and private-sector
cybersecurity workforce. Controversies: Hiring and
retention authorities, occupational classification,
recruitment priorities, and roles of DHS, NSA, NSF,
Privately Held CI—improving protection of privatesector CI from attacks with major impacts.
Controversies: Roles of DHS and other federal
agencies, and regulatory vs. voluntary approach.
Data-Breach Notification—requiring notification to
victims and other responses after data breaches
involving personal or financial information of
individuals. Controversies: Federal vs. state roles and
what responses should be required.
Cybercrime Laws—updating criminal statutes and
law-enforcement authorities relating to cybersecurity.
Controversies: Adequacy of current penalties and
authorities, impacts on privacy and civil liberties.
Five bills—addressing FISMA reform, the cybersecurity
workforce, R&D, and some aspects of CI protection—were
enacted in December 2014.
The executive-branch actions and proposed legislation are
largely designed to address several well-established nearterm needs in cybersecurity: preventing cyber-based
disasters and espionage, reducing impacts of successful
attacks, improving inter- and intrasector collaboration,
clarifying federal agency roles and responsibilities, and
fighting cybercrime. However, those needs exist in the
context of more difficult long-term challenges relating to
design, incentives, consensus, and environment (DICE):
Design: Experts often say that effective security needs to be
an integral part of ICT design. Yet, developers have
traditionally focused more on features than security, for
economic reasons. Also, many future security needs cannot
be predicted, posing a difficult challenge for designers.
Incentives: The structure of economic incentives for
cybersecurity has been called distorted or even perverse.
Cybercrime is regarded as cheap, profitable, and
comparatively safe for the criminals. In contrast,
cybersecurity can be expensive, is by its nature imperfect,
and the economic returns on investments are often unsure.
Consensus: Cybersecurity means different things to
different stakeholders, with little common agreement on
meaning, implementation, and risks. Substantial cultural
impediments to consensus also exist, not only between
sectors but within sectors and even within organizations.
Environment: Cyberspace has been called the fastest
evolving technology space in human history, both in scale
and properties. New and emerging properties and
applications—especially social media, mobile computing,
big data, cloud computing, and the Internet of things—
further complicate the evolving threat environment, but
they can also pose potential opportunities for improving
cybersecurity, for example through the economies of scale
provided by cloud computing and big data analytics.
Legislation and executive actions could have significant
impacts on those challenges. For example, cybersecurity
R&D may affect the design of ICT, cybercrime penalties
may influence the structure of incentives, the Framework
may improve consensus about cybersecurity, and federal
initiatives in cloud computing and other new components of
cyberspace may help shape the evolution of cybersecurity.
See also CRS Issues Before Congress: Cybersecurity at
Eric A. Fischer, email@example.com, 7-7071
www.crs.gov | 7-5700