>> watch booktv on c-span2 this weekend. >> a a conversation on ransomwae and cybersecurity. works as a vice president at fire nhtsa bickered and first on ransomware attacks why does it feel like we hearing about these ransomware attacks every day now? are they more prevalent than the passages going after higher

profile targets? >> of a bit of both. ransomware is getting easier to use. we had this development of what's been called ransomware as a service, the idea all capability of the four i have to do is plug in your target and pay a fee and off it goes. we'lll do the work for you collect the rents and and you make a lot of money and pay a little of the money off to the person who gave s you that service. it's getting easier to do. second they go after bigger targets. it's like criminals or bank robbers they got to banks that's with the money is. in this case ransom actors are going after big targets than it is the up and running, knowing if they go down significant time or likelihood to might and are still affect a bit pressure on pay the ransom and move forward. r situation, we do not know if they paid the ransom, they went up and running quickly. host: who are behind the attacks and when it comes to the service providers, why cannot we track down those people? guest: a great question. a part of the challenge is that

we are associating the anonymity at peak -- a non-m&a techniques, he saw an effort by the fbi to see his back the vast majority of the colonial pipeline paid ransom over the last few days, they were able to trace the bitcoin transaction. it is a public record. they were able to trace the transaction and they were able to get the private seat access the wallet. did they get -- today take a civil action intelligent? what did they do to get that key? what of the thing is that we are going after these targets, we have to get more aggressive. it is a lot of criminal hacker gangs, but a lot of times, these criminal hacker gains in places like russia and in china are operating either with the knowledge of come up with the assent of, or at the request of those countries and so in russia, there's not a lot of hiking going on without the

government knowing about it and actively endorsing it and often times, these hackers are actually in the daytime, they work for the russian government, nights and weekends and make money on the side. host: can you give us a brief history of ransomware attack's? guest: ransomware has been around a long time because what it is is a -- we have seen the use of viruses going back to the 80's. oftentimes, those viruses were designed to extract some cost on a the end target and so, change behavior. sometimes, that turns into ransomware. in the modern area -- era, we see the ability to encrypt systems and that is where this idea of using ransom will give you the keys if you do it. the biggest example that i will say about ransomware was actually something that masqueraded as ransomware but was not actually appeared a russian attack against ukraine in 2017, they went in, they deployed what looked like

ransomware, they were actually trying to delete a wiper virus to destroy systems in ukraine. they were successful in ukraine, but they were even more successful or unintentionally successful because that malware spread and actually cost about $10 billion globally and they are about 6 billion companies associated with ukraine that cost them about $200 million each. host: we hear so often about u.s. cyber warfare capabilities and we talk about budget and spending in that area on this program, something we cover every year when budget comes up. why can't we unleash those capabilities against these criminal organizations or are we doing that? guest: it is interesting you asked that question on the just this past week, you heard fbi director say that we will treat ransomware the way we dealt with terrorists after 9/11. we have the wake-up call, we will use a whole of government

approach. one question you have to ask, let's say we have the cyber offensive weapons, how do we utilize them, we want to utilize them against the attackers, and are they or their nation state sponsors and again sometimes there are nationstate sponsors, are they going to punch back and what is that involved? there are a lot of questions about how to go after this. what is clear is that there is a variety of things you might do. one, you need to get better defenses, so the government has to work together, companies have to work with one of the because here's the thing, we cannot affect individual companies to defend against nationstates, they have virtually unlimited resources when it comes to cybersecurity other it is ransomware are sending else in this criminal hacker gangs are hacking nationstates -- we have to adopt a commission for a collective defense mentality. host: our topic, cybersecurity, ransomware attack's, if you want

to join the conversation, you can do so. the lines as usual, republicans (202) 748-8001. democrats (202) 748-8000. independents (202) 748-8002. we talked about your work at george mason university. about your background in public service and your expertise in this area. guest: thank you for that question. i started out in capitol hill as a young staff appeared i started as a computer systems manager, i was doing i.t. work and went up the policy realm. when i came back, i had a chance to work in the bush administration at the justice department at the office of legal policy. i worked on a range of the cyber and intelligence matters, including president bush's comprehensive cyber security initiative. and then i want to private practice for a couple of years, i was a trial lawyer and had a chance to work with the house intelligence committee where we -- it was enacted into law in a

modified form in 2015. and went on to work with the senate relations committee and had an awesome opportunity in the last six years, worked for general alexander, the former director -- at iron it. -- ironnet. host: how concerned should capitol hill be about this capital -- about this attack. guest: it is an important issue because members of congress have to represent their constituents. an attack on a system can harm them in doing their job. in the larger scheme, this was just one example of what can happen with ransomware. it brings home to members of congress what is happening day in and day out to public school districts, the police department, sheriff's department, firefox -- fire departments and the colonial pipeline.

and jbs, the meatpacking. it is not just ransomware, this is a larger threat we are seeing with cybersecurity, attackers getting more aggressive, nations getting more aggressive, and the harder challenge our defenses are not what they need to be and our government is not doing what they need to do on working with the industry side, but also deterring these activities. one president biden goes next week to meet with president putin, he has to be clear to president putin, love, we will not take this stuff from your government or from people operating in your country anymore. you will pay cost of this continues. -- if this continues. caller: good morning. mr. jaffer, do you think there is any real push or any agency, be it the government, the military, or schools where they are actually really pushing

cybersecurity for students to learn and for us to actually get a hold on cyber threats facing our nation? guest: it is a great question. the national science foundation has a number of initiatives to improve cybersecurity education around the country, in the k-12 level, funded by federal grant dollars, that is the important part. also, the national security agency funds at the higher education level, including through k-12. there's a lot of government agencies working in the space, but pamela is right, which is, there is not enough education, not in k-12 and for yet our peers for what we need to do at the basic level, getting that cyber hygiene right. it goes beyond that, not just enough to get your head cyber

hygiene right, that will help a lot, but you have to be prepared for the large-scale attackers to come after you because even if you are -- you might be collateral damage. host: we do not want to miss an opportunity to talk about the national security institute at george mason. guest: the national security institute was founded four years ago. we were looking around and looked at the think tank space and the academic space and what we realized was, there really was not -- a think tank that looked at the hard questions about cybersecurity that brought together a bipartisan group of experts. what other concrete answers we can give to members of congress, their staff, things that can do actual recommendations? we have a great team out there working, including jessica, brent, wendy, and john, a terrific crew at the national security institute. host: we will jump across the

potomac river to arlington. independent, good morning. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: yes sir. caller: my comment is from the julep -- geopolitical perspective. i want your audience and guest to talk to the idea of hacking is a first order effect, so the idea is that if someone asked our infrastructure, then we go in and we respond by going into it and creating cyber networks or cybersecurity defense, but in reality, there could be the geopolitical purpose of saying, hey, look, we do not want america to work closely with, let's say, at this country, country y, country z. although we are throwing words and energy towards what is happening right now, oh, russia did this, this happened from russia, we can trace the ip

address to russia. i would like to have your guest to talk about that it is possible that the ip address seems to come from russia, but you can be talking about their countries and i do not just mean countries like china or wherever, you can be talking about a smaller nationstates that are trying to influence the u.s. government behavior, so if you could speak to that. guest: he raises a great point to say that we are seeing cyberspace and cyber attacks and cyber attacks and used as an element of national power. yes, jackson is right that russia, china, iran, north korea, they are the biggest players, but a lot of smaller nationstates are getting into this business. he has right to say that sometimes you might see false light activities, designed to look like it was the russians or chinese when it was somebody else. the thing about that type of effort is that the u.s. government is actually really good at attribution.

it is hard, but they are good at it. what you see the u.s. doing more recently is coming out publicly and saying, we have done the work, we have done our homework, we figured out is the russian. when the u.s. government comes out publicly, you can take it to the bank because they spent a lot of time looking at these issues. that being said, you want to be on alert to who else might be involved, what they might be doing, and what their agenda is. jackson's point about looking at the geopolitical points is right on. host: caller: i am going to show some of my lack of knowledge to some degree. i am just wondering whether there could be any connection between cybersecurity and ransom attacks, with the accusations that have taken place regarding our voting machines? is there any connection, or are

they totally different, if in fact attacks were done on our voting machines and affected them? guest: that's an interesting question. the hard thing to figure out is, did something happen during the elections and if so, what happened? we know the russians, chinese, and iranians were involved in 2016, primarily the russians and looking at ways to get into voter rolls and manipulate our body of politics by modifying narratives, amplifying narratives on both sides of the issues, tweeting dissension. we know the russians were in 2016 and we saw activity like that in 2020 with the iranians, russians, and chinese. we don't have evidence that voting machines were affected, but you have the right to ask the question, are people who have the skill set to engage in ransomware attack's might go after things like voter

machines? we know that nations like russia and china have advanced capabilities. the question is how they deployed and used them, and what with the cost be for them and what would we do should we find it out? host: cybersecurity, ransomware attack's are the topic. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. i want to drive on your private sector experience, ironnet. take me through a typical case. when does a company find out they have been part of a ransomware attack? what do you recommend when they do find out, and how do you resolve it? guest: part of our goal is to get ahead of these attacks and stop them before they happen, and make sure the entire ecosystem, supply chain,

customers, and partners are well protected. we are looking for behavioral anomalies, things that are odd and different and identify new and novel threats and stop them before they cause your system to go down and the ransomware attack. if somebody comes and says, we were attacked by a ransomware attack, we have a group of very committed hunters who can look in your system and say, let's get them out, get the ransomware isolated and protect your system now and going forward. we have a lot of partners in industry that we work with, aws, microsoft, and the like where we deploy additional capabilities to defend our clients and their customers as well. key to the whole thing in my mind is it is not about one company. you can defend one company and that's great, they are well protected, but one company can be taken down not just by an attack on them, as we saw on

colonial pipeline and jbs, but one of their suppliers or partners. run the russians came in through solar winds corporation, they attacked it to get in to the u.s. government. we want to defend not just the company but an entire ecosystem, get industry to work together and work together with government. that is what's ironnet concept -- that is what ironnet's concept is. members of congress, a lot of key leaders, they actually wrote in their report last year that said we need a paradigm shift. host: it was angus king who came on the program last year when that report came out to talk about the issues. you can watch that on c-span.org . you mentioned the colonial attack. on capitol hill, high-profile testimony, joseph blount, talking about the attack and their response.

years a little bit. [video clip] >> darkside demanded a financial payment to unlock the systems. we had cyber defenses in place but the reality is those defenses were compromised. the attack forced us to make difficult choices in real-time that no company ever wants to face. but i am proud of the way our people reacted quickly to isolate and contain the attack so that we could get the pipeline back up and running safely. i'm also very grateful for the immediate and sustained support of law enforcement and federal authorities, including the white house. we reached out to federal authorities within hours of the attack, and they have been true allies as we have worked quickly and safely restored our operations. i especially want to thank the department of justice and the fbi for their leadership and the progress they announced earlier this week. i also want to express my

gratitude to the employees at colonial pipeline, and the american people, for your action to support as we responded to the attack, and dealt with the disruption that it caused. we are deeply sorry for the impact that this attack had. but we are also hardened -- heartened by the resilience of our company and country. i want to address two additional issues on your minds, and i'm going to address them the only way i know how -- directly and honestly. first, the ransom payment. i made the decision to pay and i made the decision to keep the information about the payment as confidential as possible. it was the hardest decision i've made in my 39 years in the energy industry, and i know how critical our pipeline is to the country. i put the interests of the country first. i kept the information closely held because we were concerned about operational safety and

security, and we wanted to stay focused on getting the pipeline back up and running. i believe with all my heart, it was the right choice to make. host: if you want to watch that entire hearing, you can do so on our website at c-span.org. jamil jaffer, not to monday morning quarterback, but your critiques of that response? guest: i actually think he said what he had to say. he was very plainspoken, direct, and clear about his position and frankly, here's the reality. companies like colonial pipeline are in a tough situation. today, we don't defend as well as we could and the government doesn't share information with industry as it should. industry doesn't share with the government to understand the threats. we've got to bring industry together, companies and companies and industry and government to defend cyberspace. these companies are in a tough position. let's ask ourselves, the

pipeline was down for a week and everyone was worried about a longer-term supply disruption. you saw people doing crazy things like putting gasoline in plastic bags. by the way, don't do that. people were starting to ward gasoline but the pipeline was back up within a week and we didn't see the major supply chain disruption beyond a few incidents. it was in part because the company and ceo made a smart decision. they promptly took the pipeline off-line, got their systems in order, and restored the pipeline. one way they got it restored was a 75 bit cane -- 75 bitcoin, 4.1 million-dollar payment to get it back up and running. in the last 24 hours we've learned government was able to trace the payment and pullback 67 bitcoin. it is less money because bitcoin has dropped in value, but this

is a big win. colonial pipeline was able to get up and running quickly, no supply disruptions to the country. the money was reclaimed. this actually seems like a net win and while there is a lot of criticism to be had and a lot of people are saying a lot of things, let's be candid. if the pipeline had been down for two or three weeks, it would have been more. we don't want to incentivize bad behavior, and the more time ransom gets paid, the more it incentivizes bad actors. we have to move forward as a nation and part of it involves the government getting involved and deterring this activity by going after the criminal actors and nationstates. host: on bitcoin and ransomware -- is cyber currency possibly responsive here -- responsible here? guest: some people think cyber

currency is the heart of the problem because you can make anonymous payments. bitcoin is anonymous in the sense that you don't know who owns the wallet. what is also important is you can follow the money because it is all in public. the block chain ledger is there for everyone to see. the hard part is, how do you get access to that money? the fbi got the private key, really interesting question how they got that. they went to a federal court in california, got an order, and seized the money. host: peter out of old-line, connecticut, independent. caller: good morning. is the only way we will find out if the government has responded to cyber attacks through the newspaper? host: you are asking is there a full report somewhere that the government makes? caller: we just don't know when we respond. there is no headline that says

-- u.s. responded to russian cyber warfare. i hope we are responding, but how do we know we are? guest: it is a great question because it goes to the question of, how do you deter bad behavior? a lot of people have said deterrence doesn't work in cyberspace. it is just a different domain and doesn't function. i disagree and think deterrence can and doesn't -- does work in cyberspace what we don't practice it. make public your response. do deter someone from doing bad stuff whether it is your kid or a nationstate and he want them to stop engaging in cyber attacks, you have to tell them your redlines, say what will happen. if you do x, i will respond with y. you have to tell them what your capability is to respond and what your response will look like, here is the many things i will do to you if you do it. most importantly, when the bad

thing happens, you've got to respond and engage to extract costs and engage as a deterrent. my view, which is in an unanimous view, but it works better when you do it in public. it is not the party that you responded to but all people see, when you punch the united states in the teeth in cyberspace or elsewhere, they will punch back harder and you will experience a lot of pain. host: donald in alexandria -- if we engage in a full-blown cyber war with china or russia, who will win and what will the cost to standard of living be? guest: great question. one reason we've been leery to respond in cyberspace is because the reality is we have a significant portion of our economy and our innovation that depends on functioning cyber environments. if we engage in a cyber war,

that will cost a lot. your caller is right to raise that question, but here's the other question -- are we already in a form of cyber war already? we've been seeing attack after attack, increasing in speed and quantity and disruptive behavior, by nationstates. we may be at a low level now and not know it. it is important to note that when we get hit in cyberspace, we don't have to respond in cyberspace. we can respond in the physical domain, with sanctions, diplomatic measures, a lot we can do to deter that activity. we often think, if it happens to be in cyberspace, i've got to respond that way. that's not the case. host: just about 15 minutes left with jamil jaffer. best thing to do to check out his work is follow him on twitter or his work at national security. gm you.edu, the george

mason university law school security institute. you can call him as well at (202) 748-8000 democrat (202) 748-8001 republican, and (202) 748-8002 independent. miguel and maryland, republican, good morning. caller: how's it going? thank you for having me. host: what's your question or comment? caller: i have both. i'm going to start with my comment. sometimes i have a really hard time believing a lot of these things that are going on. sometimes -- i know for a america has the largest cyber warfare group in our country. the intelligence services they control our media, our social media, our internet and these people slipped through the pipeline.

it sounds like some kind of cia sleeper cell would do and blame it on russia or china or whoever they want the enemy to be. i don't trust theintelligence services in this country anymore because of what they've done . they call white people the greatest threat to our society. white supremacy is the greatest threat. i haven't seen a klan rally in 50 years >> so you're saying it's false flag operations. >> guest: there is a current today to disrupt government and it comes with a long history in our country of disrupting large entities of power . we distrusted the power of the king the way the king used that power so there is a healthy way to think about

the government and what it's doing and engaging in covert activities but the thing at that's important to note is that our intelligence community does not operate against americans . that's not what there's authorized to do. i worked on thecommittee that engaged in that kind of oversight . so there are a lot of ways that doesn't happen but your caller is right to be skeptical and ask questions . when we talk about false flag operations currently we will often times go after foreign nations in an effort to identify what they're doing and preventthem from acting against the united states . that's exactly what we should be doing. a lot of peopletalk about why would the us government be surveilling our allies for the light . our allies and enemies surveilled us and our job is to survey all them and understand what they're doing and protect our national security and protect americans. that's what our national intelligence community is designed to do. i am skeptical like your caller is and i want to make

sure we're doing a good thing at the same time. i've never seen a situation where theintelligence community has acted unlawfully . i have not seen evidence of what your caller is talking about. >> from south san francisco, this is an independent. yvonne, go ahead. >> caller: i'd like to see protection force sure because recently all my money is used up from unemployment and i don't know, it was too much to treat. it's been a nightmare trying to figure it out but they stole my id. they stole my card anthen they sent a new card the card was activated before i even got . it's pretty crazy . it concerns me deeply. >> john, yvonne's story is altogether too common. we see a lot of these attacks

that affect individual americans, affect their private banking accounts. time when you're going through real-life struggles in this country with the aftermath of the pandemic . it is a real challenge when n we see these cyber attacks where identities get stolen their money gets stolen. it's a problem but speaks to a larger issue in our society . it speaks to the issue of getting better education. one of her colors talk about, it's important to think about how to defend not just our companies but also our individuals. that's got to be a government and private responsibility. it can't be the private sectordoing it alone . you think about the cyber domain and no other domain of nationstates or warfare do we expect companies tostand alone . if the russians were to fly a bomb over the us and drop a bomb on the company we would respond with a bottle of our own and also we would say we didn't expect that companies have missiles. that's our job as a nation.

in cyberspace the theory is flipped on its head. we expect individuals to defend themselves and have virtual surface-to-air missiles which doesn't make any sense so we have to figure out howto bring government industry together and defend this ctnation . the government got to do its part and we got to work together and frankly it's not just sharing information but it's collaborating in real time. >> it's impressive you remember the individual colors names on the topics they call through on . we've been through several more waiting to talk to you. anthony miller, democrat, good morning. >> are you with us anthony? >> caller: c-span does a remarkable job and i commend the people behind the scenes as well as the moderators proficiency. rather, yourself, you all do such a phenomenal job and you replaced the former guard susan swain and brian lamb, i think you did a wonderful job in establishing the program

but you guys do a phenomenal job. it's amazing the intelligence and i know you guys don't get paid enough for what you do. >> i appreciate those comments. we got a few minutes left. you want to jump to your question . >> i wasn't going to call. i've got to save my calls were very specific but he just said we trust in our government andwhy ? you said there's laws to protect us from these activities with foreign agencies, whoever these blacktopagencies . and what about the lamb, felt he was forbidden and it was against the law to do what he did in america andyet he went to china funded the operation in china to do what they did . like 800 was shot out of the sky by our own military they covered it up and we paid for an investigation, billions of dollars . we cannot trust our government and. >> to your point, jamil again

onnot trusting their government . >> i do think it's important to have a healthy skepticism of frankly everything but in particular our government. we want to be sure our government is doing the right thing. our country was founded by men and women who were very skeptical of overweening power and that's why they created the first amendments to theconstitution . they created a tripartite system ofgovernment . the legislative oversees the judicial and our system of government is designed around skepticism of government power being concentrated in one place so your colors are right to talk about that. on the question of some of these activities. i'm not aware of our military but that's an interesting question. i do think it's important q that when we're skeptical of

government that we are fact based as possible. where there is a problem let's take action. let's get with members of congress and have them do what's necessary and if there needs to be reform its do those reforms we've seen where the government has gone too far congress kept in and said we want you to do less ofthat or do it under these rules and this guidance . that's an important role . and at the same time, what we don't want to do is get in a situation where we're hearing from foreign nations trying to convince us not to be skeptical of ourgovernment but to undermine the function of our government. russians are good at this. they'd like nothing better than to housequestion the fbi, the intelligence agencies, our president whether there democrat or republican . that's exactly what we saw them do well educated americans , one against the other seating dissension for the purpose of benefiting themselves . below on lab, i think it's important that weget to the

bottom of this . president trump raised the issue. president biden has now made clear it's the intent of his government to find out the answer. he's heimplicated intelligence agencies to figure out what's a leak from matlab there are questions about this and those questionsought to be figured out . >> less than 12 minutes left. i don't know if you had a chance to read the cyber security of the wall street journal that the lead story, why hackers love the hybrid workplace only a hackers dream, constantly changing mix of office and remote workers and devices that move in andout of the country . security threats, i wonder your thoughts on that. >> i think this new environment were all adapting to , it does create instant cyber security vulnerabilities. now there's a huge amount working from home for a year. i think we're likely to see a significantly hybrid environment. companies trying to come back to the office.

and a lot of them were realized workers don't come back to the office and going t to places where there offered a hybrid opportunity so we got to be able to defend our workers and frankly the intellectual property we create, not value that we create . america will always have a more innovative economy. we know that governments are focused on that and we know the chinese have stolen trillions of dollars from the united states and intellectual property. we got to protect that so it's a tough situation these security operation centers are in , getting these networks they control about everybody's own network space a dv will solve the problem but of course they're not putting devices that have been on other networks into the vpns or you bring threats and really these are difficult questions and i think a really important question that the caller asked about theproblem we need to get ahead or that you brought from the washington journal . the problem we need to get ahead of his hybrid environments if there with us to stay we need to get it.

>> a virtual private network l so you might have a situation where your own worker is talking your corporate network through an encrypted double so all the data is going back and forth. it's well protected but it's a device that creates operating on your home network and then you bring us this encrypted safe space. it's like it's almost like bringing the coronavirus into the a safe space with you. you might bring bonds in inadvertently. >> host: barbara, independent. you're on. >> caller: i have 2 questions. first is if they could see this crypto currency, why can't they determine who was going to be the recipient of the dough currency and the second is do people or do governments in russia and north korea and china, do they also get and do they

have to pay for this kind of operation? >> guest: that's a great question from barbara. one of the things to think about in cyberspace and crypto currency is if you think about the bank account andthat cornwallis , there are a lot like these numbered swiss bank accounts we heard about back in the day. these supersecret swiss bank accounts. there are anonymous 's strings of letters and numbers associated with these transactions . in order to access that string you have to have your own private string of numbers that when put together will decrypt that wallet and allow you to get access to the money. only you will have that private key and get into it so nobody pknows who owns that wallet soit's a random string of numbers. that's the issue at facebook . you can trace the random strings the money goes between, a to b to c but who

owns that you don't know. i think the interesting question is the government had this private key, shouldn't they know who controls it now can mark that a great question. that might be one of the things they're trying to figure out now we have a private key where did we get it from? you can run down who the hackers are behind us. the darkside group operated out of eastern europe with washington infrastructure ties. we may not know who's behind them. back or maybe one or two more phone calls. republican, good morning. >> first of all a response to gail about the kkk. it's not like the kkk goes on facebook or twitter and advertises the klan rally. and they, you want to talk about awhite supremacist rally , there's that one right therein charlottesville

virginia .>> host: mike brings up that topic and the idea of a dark web and how communication happens outside our regular internet. >> it's an important point. exactly what's going on, just almost 5 years ago we heard the fbi director say you're watching theseterrorists, we knew they would recruit in iraq andsyria . we had eyes on them . we saw them recruiting to conduct attacks here and as getting they started that communication up and running what they would do is let's move to the dark web, let's move to telegram or other forms ofmedication where now the otgovernment didn't have access to it . this encrypted indication while it's important to carry your financial transactions, at the same time it protects these terrorists are

recruiting americans and protecting ran somewhere hackers and other cyber security threats against nationstates and the like. got to figure out a way to secure that data get access to it and make sure our intelligence agencies and government will protect gus against those threats so it's a tough question. i think miguel raises an important point is there are activities happening in the unitedstates . you've got activities with our domestic law enforcement authorities and go over after foreigners overseas. >> ,baltimore maryland, independent . >> good morning, let me say first john, great posting at mister jaffer, very interesting information that you've given so far. i have a question about those credit monitoring services that we made for. how reliable are they and i know the government also has more government employees, their security monitoring

services as well . howreliable are they . >> that, it's hard to say how reliable one service or another and as a general letter i think if you believe your identity has been taken or stolen and by the way most identities have been at some level with your social securitynumber or email . what monitoring allows you to do is be alerted when somebody makes a rather request to create a new bank account or credit card or get a new loan and that's how these scammers work. the open accounts in your name and run up the bill and take off . you're stuck with the bill and sometimes you have to pay and the credit card will work with you but still. your credit . it's a financial institution hasto be out of money . those credit areas can't help they are. great question and i don't have a great answeron that one . >> always enlightening to chat with you. founder of the national security institute at george

mason university law school and also senior vice president at iron social security. >> the house energy and commerce subcommittee held a hearing on the well-being of unaccompanied children crossing the border. the health and human services assistant secretary for children and families testified on what her office is doing to coordinate with the care of children. watch the entire hearing tonight at eight eastern you're on c-span2 . >> bill bratton on his book the profession, a memoir of community and the art of policing in america really he's interviewed by charles

ramsey, former philadelphia police commissioner and dc police chief and so they at 10 pm eastern, yale university history professor elizabeth swenson with herbal america on fire, the untold history of police violence and lack resilience since the 1960s. watch book tv on c-span2 this weekend. >> black texans celebrated and many white texans responded with violence. their stories about people who were hit because they celebrated the end of slavery. there are accounts of unleashing a torrent of violence on the friedmans, someone talks about a person who recounted coming to an area and finding almost 30

bodies of black people, men women and children hanging from trees . talks of bodies in the river. once blacks cease to be property and once whites lost their control over them a number of whites responded with extreme hostility. >> pulitzer prize-winning historian and harvard professor annette gordon reed talks about juneteenth and shares her stories growing up in texas during the 60s and 70s. sunday at 8 pm eastern on q&a. you can listen to q&a as a podcast where you getyour podcast .

>>. [music] >> host: then joins us on the conversation on votingrights . served as president for the american way, first remind viewers what your group's vision for theamerican way is and how you carry it out . >> we believe freedom, opportunity, justice and equality really is what creates democracy. we were founded 40 years ago by congressman barbara jordan and norman beer, a man who brought us good times and all the family and facts of life and taught us families who love each othersometimes have to fight .