guaranteed that the place would present a reform program. up until now, there are no specific proposals from greece. indeed, yesterday people were meeting with the basis you are losing confidence in the rest of europe. dignity means strength, honesty and the government has said to degree people -- as said to the greek people that the banks are closing. the ecb is ratcheting up the pressure. the banks are open on tuesday, it is closed -- it is wednesday. you are not telling your people the truth. and that is not dignified politics.

i would like to continue to discuss the indignity. involved in terms of who your friends are. look around this chamber. you will see to the far left and the far right you have applause. mr. tsipras i think fidel castro wrote you a letter of congratulations on your magnificent triumph. it seems you are surrounding yourself with the wrong friends. [laughter] [applause] please continue. may i say coming else about dignity. ? the dignity of others in europe.

if you do not like the people, it is not extraneous financial institutions who will pay for this. is going to be stained with 24 billion euros, it will be poland and france -- it seems to me we must look at those people's dignity, people another eu countries. mr. president, i would also like to bring up the principal, the concept is in dire straits. you also know what the situation is of the people in bulgaria.

how can you tell work area in terms of solidarity, how can you tell the people in bulgaria in terms of solidarity, that five eu countries, the standard is living lower than grace. eece. i would like to add that european culture, people on this continent need hope. they need hope in the future. letatvia, the situation yesterday. in 2009, they were facing an economic catastrophe. but the parties there did not resort to a referendum. they sorted out their budgets, their fiscal situation. they have faith in the future and in their people. it seems to me you are not standing for hope. in your approach.

you are not concert to democracy. >> one moment please. one moment please, mr. president. >> if you try to shout him down, he is unable to use his time effectively. if it is quiet, he will be able to use his speaking time. >> on democracy democracy involves people sitting and listening. they all know that. mr. weber you have the floor once more. mr. weber: i'm grateful for the

applause. it shows the extremists here trying to destroy europe. alexis tsipras is standing here as a representative of greek democracy, saying he carried out a referendum of vote. is he a socialist? he is also thinking about organizing referendum, because the slovakian's are fedns are fed up with shelling out for the greeks. there are sufficient national perspectives in europe. europe is not the sum, it is compromise. sadly, you have departed from that path. mr. president please conclude. i would say that alexis tsipras

with respect to being presented of this country we are at loggerheads with you. you engage in provocation. we engage in compromise. you are looking at failure, we are looking at success. you do not like europe, we love europe. and i hope you will be able to come up with a program, finally. thank you.

[applause] >> clearly, this is a lively debate. we are aware of that. i don't think it is a bad thing. we are particularly pleased to be here today, but i now call the leader of the social democratic group. >> thank you, presidential's. schultz. >> europe, without grace, is something unthinkable. as a social democrat.

greece is an essential part of europe and the euro zone. without greece in the euro zone, europe would no longer be itself. and that is why we have opposed and will oppose extremist political speculations to our calling for greece to leave europe. i could quote what mr. verify varoufakis would say. or i could reply to statements that have been made by our colleague, mr. weber. but i would prefer to undermine the sobriety, the seriousness

the constructive miss of the ness of the president. who has for all of these months work to find a solution. a positive solution. today is not the time for friends to apologize to each other. what is at stake is too serious for us to throw around with recriminations, too serious to turn this house into a football stadium. it is not a time for divisions in the house, in europe. it is a time for us to stand united. because the future is at stake. and we should be above party politics. what is it say to europe's future, which includes greece. i agree with mr.. wbereber on one

point. the most important institution of europe, the parliament, cannot have its president not taking part in the euro summit. i would formally ask him to invite mr. scholz to his meeting. mr. tsipras you are not a member of my party. but at this point in time, i feel i am a european. and as a european, i would like to save to you, for the good of europe, we socialists will never accept grexit. never. and recently, hope has been reignited. and i can note that everyone is

chairing a constructive attitude. the attitude of heads of state and government yesterday was politics. and the political forces in greece are positive about a possible solution. i think the traditions are there for an agreement to be reached this week. and it is now up to the government to decide on reforms support for labor, combating corruption tax evasion -- all of these are measures that required not because europe did not impose them, but they will benefit greek citizens. i think it is also right to discuss structuring debt. that is something worth a commitment in 2012, and it

should be honored now. i think we should have a european conference on debt, and the pooling of debt. i think and i'm concluding this is what we should be thinking about, trying to reignite hope in greece. that it is possible to be an median term agreement. i would say that those who read about these days in the future, when it has become history, should be able to read that in this parliament and the european institution, amongst the greek authorities, there were men and women who knew how to put aside their divisions and rise above party politics. and enter into an act of constructive this to save greece and to save europe.

-- an act of constructivene ss to save greece and to save europe. [applause] >> he has the floor. >> i should start by saying that something is rotten in the state of greece. but something is also rotten in the eu too. in the beginning there was the original sin. today, we are seeing the roots.

ladies and gentlemen, i have an impression of a piece that has been unfolding before our eyes -- nothing is what it seems. the greeks want help. but at the same time, they want a free hand, not knowing the old saying that he who pays the fiber is to call the tune. -- pays the piper gets to call the tune. in the greece euro relations, we have a number of final rounds of talks. the word final does not mean final. it means something else. we hard-core currency unionists

speak about greece, and what we have in mind is the monetary union. and the seeing it as the crucial point, they argue that you heard in this chamber once greece is out, the entire construction is set to fall to pieces. either one or the other, ladies and gentlemen. so if this continues, i think we will be more and more confused about who and what we are trying to say. is it the currency union, greek society, the credibility of the government, the creditors? the reputation of angela merkel? or the infallibility of the currency union? we certainly, ladies and gentlemen, cannot say all of

these. there will be casualties, i'm sure. [applause] >> thank you. now, for the democratic bit. >> i say to him at the moment, european institutions have to be united. european council and parliament, if you are invited here, you are invited here for council meetings. [applause] mr. tsipras welcome. you do not have to be afraid of european parliament. your refusal from the beginning that cannot be true. you are here. i'm pleased you are here. it is in the european parliament

that for the first time, we discuss no solutions possible. in the case of greece and in the case of the eurozone, when you do not have the backing of the basis of democracy and european parliament. that is what we are doing today. but i have to tell you, and you started and said, it is true. the greeks did enormous effort. and and it is true. the greek political class did not do enough. that is the problem today. and i'm angry, i have to tell you. i am angry because you are talking about reforms, but we never see greek proposals for reform. [applause] and i'm angry, why?

i'm angry because we are falling towards a grexit. already five years, with the help and support of the people of the extreme right at the end and not only we are revoking, we are running towards a grexit. it is not you and it is not we who are paying the bills. it is ultimately the greek citizens who are going to pay the bills of a grexit. and so, i have to tell you, if we want to avoid it, there is only one possible way. you know it very well. the only possible way is to come forward in the coming days, in the coming 48 hours with a credible reform package. i doesn't mean to say -- it

means you make a roadmap. a clear calendar, no intentions that there are indicates for different reforms. we need them desperately in greece. let me give you the five things you have to do. let me give you the five things what you have to do. i will be ready to come to athens to discuss it with you. with you directly. what you have to do, first ending the system. you need to put together legislation for that on the table, that does not exist. not to apply yourself. a few weeks ago, 13 directors in the ministry of education have to be nominated. and by accident, there were 12. only one did not know. that is reality, you are using the system. you are using the system, you

are falling in the trap. the party of changing greece, and it is nothing at all but using the system for years and years to the own advantage. you have downsized the public sector. i know it is difficult maybe for the leftists. but it has to be done. because 800,000 people. [applause] mr. tsipras you have to transform the banks in a private banking sector. you have to open the markets and the professions for young people. we do not have legislation, but legislation on the table to open at least -- and finally, let's and the proposed privileges and your country. the privileges of the owners,

the military, the orthodox church in your country. [applause] you like privilege? very fine. they like privileges. i do not. the privileges of the greek islands. and the privileges not to forget of the political parties inside greece that receive money your party receive such money. and that is, what i asked you but all this together in a package and put it on a table now and in the coming days. i am pretty sure that from the european side, we are going to be ready to find a solution for debt. we will find a solution for all of these problems. it has to be done that way. and you can do it because there

was never a prime minister in greece who has such a strong mandate as you. you have even a double mandate. you own the referendum. you are in the only position, the only political leader in greece to put an end to that system. i say this to you, we also have a responsibility. we have to make, and my opinions are possible, and we have to do it as fast as possible. also in the council, first things first. you need to come forward with a reform package. ladies and gentlemen, you have a choice. and that is my conclusion, the choice you have is very simple. how do you want to be remembered? as an electoral accident who made this people poorer in his country? or do you want to be remembered, mr. tsipras, as a

real revolutionary reformer? i'm talking about the new one. the real one between the two world wars, who modernize the country. that is a choice to make. and i know what you people want, 80% of your people want to stay in europe. and in the eurozone. show that what you can do, you are a real leader, and not a false prophet. [applause]

>> and now, the leader. >> president, prime minister, my time has been given to having yielded to other groups. i will be brief. this is not the time, given the crisis and given the disaster, forwhich has become tangible and hit home, given the days ahead at this time, let's not use this stage to demonstrate talent. mr. weber guy say to you very directly to you, we do not need arrogance and anti-communism at this time. you can keep that.

for other places, that is not going to bring anyone closer. this is not some kind of bavarian stampede. this is parliament. i noted that you were very moderate and setting out positions from the european council point of view. that is how it should be. i don't want to suggest that something did not take place. people were saying enough, that is what they were saying. enough, we have had enough. they're saying we want to stay in the european union and we want to stay in european parliament, as well. so, do not listen to the hard lines on the creditor side. to keep your own ideological

prejudices and foist them onto a number of people. we have to do something now, as we look back at the history of germany and europe, i think germany has proved with the debt , which was built up from the first world war, that they do not have to pay decades. they were still, they had issues from the first world war. and this is why there was an international debt conference in 1953 which laid the basis for germany to go forward. and it is about time that we look into the history books and we shouldered this responsibility to our people in europe. not to engage in one-upsmanship that we know it all. i have a monopoly of wisdom, that applies to germany

whatever group they belong in. conditions have to be taken to find solutions that are sustainable. not just give us short-term gratification so we can stand up and ask other people to do stuff. let's respect people in europe, let's respect the decision taken on this. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen when yesterday i was preparing myself i scanned the newspapers that i have stacked up for the last week in my office. as i always do, i don't know how things are going to pan out. that is the case this moment.

on the top of the newspaper pile, last week's papers, there was a german publication with a photo. the portrait of a greek pensioner weeping, broken down, standing in front of an atm machine at a bank. that is the photo burned in my memory for this week. it seems to me that photo is some way to explain the reasons why 60% of the greeks who voted on sunday voted the way they did. and that photograph also captured some of the motivations of the people who voted yes. because the votes and greece were the response to the impoverishment of large swathes

of society. a lot of people in greece simply cannot go on. and the vote was quite clearly a vote expressing hope for change, with reaching out to the european union. and that is a task before you, i think. you are at an historic moment, you are the strongest prime minister in greece in my personal recollection. you have to be the person, sir who manages to provide the prospect of reform for your people, but in an orderly manner. the reform program of the troika has really turned reform and to a word you can only stand back from aghast.

you might say i am naive. but ia am expecting you would come here saying to put an end to nepotism and corruption. i thought that alexis tsipras would come around here and say this is how i am going to go about it with my people. so we want to have your views of a fair system set out but you are going to present your view of a fair pension system. we all recognize that you cannot cut further low pensions, but how can we ensure the system is fair in greece? what is the future of the health system in greece? so you do not need connects for the indigents.

a better future, so that you can ensure you have the europeans on side with you, that is what we need. the cohesion that has been eroded over the last five years can be recaptured if you, with your people, talk with the people of europe. i am not just talking about heads of state and governments. or some of the people today who are not terribly keen to see you being invited here. it seems to me you need to get into a direct debate with europeans. you have to move away from this erroneous policy of debt-burden. it is something i think we need to have a solution, not just for the greeks, but for a solution that can be applied to other countries in crisis.

then it would be fair, then it would be european. mr. tspiras, i know that you cannot stop time. i really wish it were possible to do that. but clearly, everything has to be decided this week. please listen to those who earnestly wish to see a european solution. think about it. because you are making a strong all for democracy. europe is vast, greece is part of europe, as well. they did solidarity, too. but democracy and i'm sorry do not match up. i wish you success. and i wish success for europe, as well. [applause] >> and what we're seeing in this

chamber and across the whole of europe is an irreconcilable difference -- a split between the north and the south of europe. european projects are beginning to die. nobody in this room would recognize that. but the people of europe are saying we were never asked whether we wanted this. this has been foisted upon us. and we need to understand why doesn't work. those monsters backed up the clever dangerous law that if they put in place an economic and monetary union, that as night follows day, it would be a political union. but the acceptance, the north and south of europe would converge. we would also to love each other. we would all begin to feel the

european identity. we would all begin to show allegiance to the flag and the anthem. those of us that criticize this, we were told we were extremists. and we lacked vision. one vision we did not lack them up we understood that the countries of europe are different. and if you try to force together different people or different economies without first seeking the consent of those people, it is unlikely to work. and the plan has failed. it didis not just greece, the whole of the mediterranean now finds itself in the wrong currency. virtually no one in the political arena as a courage to stand up and say that. indeed, i feel that the continent is now divided from north to south. there is a new berlin wall and it is called the euro. and the old indemnities are being resumed, just listen to the way that the german leader

of the democrat group this morning attacked mr. speered. it was disgusting, but show the way north and south feel. your country should have never joined the euro. i think you would knowledge that, but the big banks forced u.n.. goldman sachs, the german arms manufacturer, those of bailouts were french, german and italian banks. they have a help you at all. these years of austerity, high unemployment, increasing poverty, none of it has worked. your debt to gdp ratio has gone from 100% to 80% right now. it would be madness, sir, to continue. you have been very brave. you call that referendum, when

one of your predecessors try to do the same, brussels had him removed. they tried their best again. you have to leave the euro and leave the union. even mr. scholz, the president of the parliament you thought might be neutral, said that the palace supplies might go down. the threats and bullying, research firm. but you cannot have your cake and eat it. they will give you no more, they cannot afford to. if they give you more, they will have to give other zone members more. frankly, if you have a current you should lead the great people out of the eurozone with your head held high. get back your democracy, get back control of your country. give your people, give your people the leadership and the hope that they crave. yes, it will be tough for the first few months. with a devalued currency, a friend of greece all of the

world, you will recover. [applause] >> mr. alexis tsipras oppositions are different a whole series of topics. there is no question about that. we share the desire to give the protectionism back to the people. again, it is the interest of the bureaucrats. we were quite clear about the referendum. this referendum on austerity in greece means a return to the noblest kind of politics in europe, which is often technocratic. it is the institution and drop

the mask -- show your true faith. the horror, they have tried everything to win the referendum. there is moral pressure, the disasters that would take place on a no vote. we had this in france, the same kind of thing when we voted on the constitution. and the president of the parliament is sitting here, even dared to suggest that your democratically elected government should be overthrown, mr. tsipras. and the imf report was published on thursday, the groups have tried to prevent that. that reflected your view that greece cannot affect to pay the debt because it is unsustainable and must be renegotiated. and the european central bank

finally tried to intervene by strangling greek banks. i think this is the first time in history that a central bank has unleashed a completely artificial crisis. but the anger of the great people, these ofvis a vis the austerity, the threats the greek people raised. they showed their true mettle. what people would have accepted what the greek people have put up with for five years? who would have accepted that, the liberals who frenetically applauded the list of charges? would you except that kind of campaign? make a campaign for it. why do promised your respective peoples, 25% cut in wages. a 25% cut in their pensions.

but that across to your people's. s. they would love it. a tripling of unemployment, the brave. live up to your promises. [applause] >> mr. alexis tsipras euro and austerity are siamese twins. they are joined at the hip. you cannot get your people out of austerity unless you are out of the euro. i am in agreement that in a concerted fashion greece must negotiate a way out of this clamp -- the steel jaw that is closing on this side of europe. all of the people in europe should look at what is happening in greece. and maybe an exit from the euro

would allow for the renewa renewal of growth. i'm afraid that greece will show by leaving the euro, that you can survive that are outside of it than in it. it is not irreversible, as you have in trying to sell us for years. it is not forever. no europe is not something that cannot be reversed. the first crisis of the euro was a financial one, and the second one is a political one. with people who dare to say no. you cannot hold this crisis, after so many mistakes have been made, it is high time to have a dismantling of the euro area in the countries and the area would be diminished. thank you. [applause]

>> thank you, very much, indeed. i would like to address you mr. scholz on your on acceptable words about the greek referendum. on what basis should the greeks look for another currency? with what mentality, what competence, what right are you getting involved in the political happenings in my country? i would like to address the german chancellor for what she has done, what the germans did to the greeks during the second world war. over one million dead. they start toved to death.

there was this huge loan to the third reich. of millions from these repayments which you are refusing to actually including the question of the debt. and so, you dare turn around and speak in this way? what about our lives, you are thinking mr. weber, should be turning to the chancellor of germany and asking her what is due? do you think the greeks will bow their heads when they did not during the slavery o the ultimatef the ottoman empire? the government now is apparently

planning to pass a new agreement, new memorandum. we can exist and survive without the eurozone. the zone should unite or dissolve. thank you. >> tomorrow, paul ryan talks about international trade, tax policy among the u.s. economy -- an event hosted by politico. live coverage starts at 8 a.m. eastern time on c-span2. >> this week on first ladies, we learn about lucretia garfield. she was an educated woman and a believer and women's rights. when her husband was assassinated, she returned to ohio and a short his legacy by making their home into an early version of the presidential library. chester arthur, a widower becomes president, and his

sister fills the role of first lady. she establishes white house social etiquette. lucretia garfield and mary arthur this sunday night on a pm eastern on c-span's original series first ladies, examining the women who filled the role of first lady and their influence on the presidency -- from martha washington to michelle obama. on american history tv on c-span3. >> c-span gives you the best access to congress. live coverage of the u.s. house congressional hearings and news conferences, bringing you events that shape public policy. every morning, washington journal's live with elected officials, policymakers, and journalists. and your comments my phone facebook, and twitter. created by america's cable companies and brought to you by your local table company or sepp blatter provider.

satellite provider. >> computer malfunctions disrupted normal functions. security severs secretary jeh johnson said they were not related in any way, or they were malicious in any way. this is at the center for international studies. he talked about the recent data reach the compromise the personal records of millions of federal workers. this is just under an hour. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the center for strategic international studies. my name is andrew schwartz. i am senior vice president for

external relations. i'm standing in for john, who is traveling. a couple of housekeeping announcements. first of all, we have to do this. this is sort of our smokey the bear thing. if there is an emergency, we have blue jackets outside who will direct you to the way out. we don't expect there to be an emergency, but we have to say that. it will be very easy to spot where to go if there is. second, at the end of the program today, please stay in your seats until the secretary can leave. but then -- and this is a little unusual -- please leave as soon as you can. [laughter] we happen to have another secretary visiting today, the secretary general of the communist party of vietnam. who was following. thus, we have pretty high security here, a couple high-security events in a row. we do a lot of events, as you know, but this is a bit of a

juggling act today. with that, it is my pleasure to welcome my colleague, the very distinguished and honorable sean o'keefe. sean is, of course former , secretary of the navy, former director of nasa, and being a tulane graduate, i feel compelled to say former chancellor of lsu, and he is wearing lsu tigers today, so go tigers. sean is here as a senior advisor with the maxwell school. some of my favorite people are in the front row. judge webster so good to see you , all. and with that i would like to produce the honorable sean o'keefe. [applause] mr. o'keefe: thank you, andrew. i appreciate the opportunity to be here to moderate this particular session on such an

important occasion. while some of that may be in reference to this morning's events, which we will hear more from the secretary in a minute i think the other thing we need to reflect on a bit is we just emerged from yet another uneventful national holiday this past weekend, with absolutely no incidents whatsoever. yet the reason for that is not accidental. it is a consequence of the diligence of extraordinary people, thousands of them on our behalf, who dedicate themselves to assuring that freedom to do the kinds of things that we did this past weekend, celebrating the birth of this nation, and also to recognize the extraordinary opportunities we have because of what they do. they get virtually no recognition for those nonevents. the gentleman who represents all of them here as a distinguished public servant who asked spent a

considerable amount of time in his professional life in public service. having started, certainly being involved as a professional attorney, he has risen through a number of different positions as the general counsel of the air force, the assistant u.s. attorney of the southern district of new york, as the general counsel of the defense department, prior to becoming the secretary of homeland security. he is the fourth to occupy that particular capacity. in each of these roles, he has distinguished himself as an exemplary public servant who has focused on the challenges of the kinds of jobs and issues that ultimately have been brought to head in this capacity, protecting all of us as the secretary of the department of homeland security. the honorable jeh johnson. [applause]

secretary johnson: thank you very much, sean. can everybody hear me? yes. ok. thank you very much. it's great to be back here at csis. thank you for allowing me to speak here today. i want to open my remarks by talking about today's events. the topic of this speeches cyber security, related to cyber security it appears that today we had system malfunctions at united, at the new york stock exchange, and the "wall street journal." i have spoken to the cfo of united myself. it appears, from what we know at this stage, that the malfunctions at united and the stock exchange were not the result of any nefarious actor.

we know less about the wall street journal at this point except that their system is up again, as is the united airlines system. cyber security is a top priority for me, the president, and this administration. it is my personal mission to significantly enhance the department of homeland security's role in the cyber security of our nation. today, i provide a status report on our efforts for the federal/civilian, dot-gov world in particular. i also take the opportunity to emphasize the importance of passing new cyber security legislation, and soon, in this congress. i applaud the congress for their bipartisan efforts so far. i will begin this speech like i end most of them.

i tell audiences homeland security is a balance. a balance between basic physical security and the freedoms we expect as americans. as i have said many times, i can build you a perfectly safe city, but it will look like a prison. we can build more walls, install more invasive screening, interrogate more people, and make everyone suspicious of each other, but not at the cost of we are as a nation of people who cherish privacy, value the freedom to travel in associate and celebrate our diversity. the same is true of cyber security. cyber security involves striking a balance. i can build you a perfectly safe e-mail system, but your contact will be limited to about 10 people. and you will be disconnected entirely from the internet and the outside world.

this, too, would be like a prison. the reality is we live in an interconnected, networked world. cyber security must be a balance between the basic security, all of online information, and the ability to communicate with and benefit from the networked world. in the meantime, the reach of the internet is growing at an exponential rate. today, there are more connected devices than human beings on the planet. in just five years, the number of devices connected to the internet is estimated to exceed 50 billion. at the same time, cyber threats are increasing in frequency, scale, sophistication, and severity. the ranges of cyber threat actors, methods of attack, and targeted victims are also expanding. this affects everyone, both in

government and the private sector, cross country and across the globe. not a week goes by without a news report of another organization being hacked. these threats come from a range of actors, including nationstates with highly sophisticated capabilities profit-motivated criminals, and ideologically motivated hackers or extremists. in the case of the breach of the office of personnel management a large amount of highly personal and sensitive information was taken by their sophisticated actor. we have determined that federal personnel records were in fact taken by this actor. dhs, the fbi, and nsa have also determined opm's system containing sensitive background information was compromised. as required by law opm provided , notice to approximately 4.2 million people impacted by the data breach involving employee

personnel records. opm is still working with an interagency team to address the total number of people affected by the breach involving security clearance background investigation information. the opm breach also remains the subject of an ongoing investigation. we have strong evidence about the identity of the actors behind the breach. as we said last week, there is a leading suspect. but we are not prepared to publicly identify those actors at this time. to be frank, our federal cyber security is not where it needs to be. but we have taken and are taking accelerated and aggressive action to get there. in response to the opm breach, on june 12, the white house announced the establishment of a cyber security sprint team

comprised of omb, nsa, dod personnel to conduct a 30-day review of the federal government's cyber security policies, procedures, and practices. on a re-prioritized basis, we are deploying teams to assess the highest value systems across the federal/civilian government and hunt for and remove ever y adversary identified in the system. there is a great deal that has been done and is being done now to secure our networks. we do in fact block a large number of intrusions, including those by state actors. but we can and must do more. as i've said before, congress can help. by law, each head of the federal

department or agency is primarily responsible for his or her own cyber security. the department of homeland security has overall responsibility for protecting federal civilian systems helping agencies better defend themselves, and providing response teams to assist agencies during significant incidents. national security systems such as those used by the military and intelligence community are secured by the department of defense and dni. there is no one silver bullet for cyber security. the department of national

security integration system is the u.s. government's 24/7 hub for cyber security information sharing, incident response, and coordination. 13 u.s. departments and agencies and 16 private sector entities have regular dedicated liaisons, while over 100 private sector entities collaborate and share information with nkik on a routine basis. given the central importance to the mission, i have elevated it within our structure so it's leaders have a reporting relationship directly to me. they share information on cyber threats and incidents and provides on-site assistance. in this fiscal year alone, they have shared over 6000 alerts and warnings and responded on-site to 32 incidents. over double the number of on-site responses for the entire prior year. it is also the place where we manage the einstein system.

einstein is the first basic layer of protection. we provided the network or matter of each federal civilian department and agency. einstein consists of three programs. einstein one and to sit at the perimeter of the agency networks. einstein one observes and records basic information about all activity entering and exiting an agency network. it is like a recording camera sitting on the perimeter fence to be reviewed when or if a certain individual enters or exits the compound. einstein two the text known prohibited adversaries that have entered or exited, and alerts us to them. einstein one hand two detect and identify malicious activity. we share that information with all departments and agencies.

this affords those agencies the opportunity to take appropriate actions to protect themselves. by the end of 2005, einstein one and two were deployed to protect only three federal agencies. today, both protect all federal civilian traffic routed through a secure gateway to the internet. then there is einstein three accelerated, also known as e3a. e3a resides with internet service provider serving the federal government. e3a has the capacity to both identify and block known malicious traffic. like the system that protects the department of defense, one key value of e3a is that it is an intrusion protection system that uses classified information to protect unclassified information. e3a was first employed in 2013.

by december 2014, e3a protected over 237,000 department personnel. today a protects over 931,000 federal personnel, or approximately 45% of the federal civilian government. i have directed that dhs make e3a fully available to all federal departments and agencies and have challenged us to make aspects of e3a available to all civilian departments and agencies by the end of 2015. e3a has demonstrated its value. since his introduction, e3a has blocked over 550,000 requests to access potentially malicious websites. these intense are often associated with adversaries who are already on federal networks, attempting to communicate with their home base and steal data

from agency networks. importantly, einstein 3a is also a platform for future capabilities and technologies for stop this includes technology that will automatically identify suspicious internet traffic for further inspection. even if we do not already know about the particular cyber security threat. as an additional line of defense, the department of homeland security helps federal agencies identify and fix problems in near real-time using continuous diagnostic and administrative programs. once fully deployed, cdm will monitor networks internally for vulnerabilities that could he exploited by bad actors. it will allow them to identify prioritize come and fix the most significant problems first.

it will also provide dhs with situational awareness about government wide risk for the broader or cyber security mission. it is divided into three phases. the first phase, being deployed now, checks to ensure that all computers and software on agency networks are secure. the second phase will be monitoring users of agency networks and ensure they do not engage in unauthorized activity. the third phase will assess activity happening inside agency networks to identify anomalies and alert security personnel. to date, we have made the first phase available to eight agencies, covering 50% of the federal civilian government. i have directed and we expect dhs make the first phase of cdm pools available to 97% of the

federal civilian government by the end of this fiscal year. i'm also requesting authorization from congress to provide additional funding to speed up cdm phase two. as our detection methods continue to improve, more of them will come to light. in fact, opm was able to detect the recent breach as a direct result of implementing new tools and best practices recommended by dhs. as we are able to see unblock more events, we will thereby identify more malicious activity and frustrated and never cherries attempts to access sensitive information and systems. also provides on-site assistance to federal agencies, as well as private companies operating critical infrastructure. we in effect may cast calls. when an incident like the opium breach occurs, it helps us find the adversary, drive them out,

and restore service. it also coordinates responses to significant incidents when other government agencies give them the information they need to respond effectively and ensure unity of effort. by the authority given to me by congress and the federal information security modernization act of 2014, i can now as secretary of homeland security issue binding operational directives to federal departments and agencies. a binding operational directive is a direction to agencies to mitigate a risk to their information system. i issued the first binding operational directive on may 21 this year. this directive required agencies to properly fix critical vulnerabilities identified by our program on their networks.

we know that we must drive change from the top. thus, working with omb, we notified departments and agency heads so they are aware of the status of their own agency efforts to comply with my directive. department and agencies responded quickly and have already reduced critical vulnerabilities covered by the binding operational directives by more than 60%. next, information sharing is also fundamental to achieving our mission. in order to sufficiently address the rapidly evolving threats to our cyber systems, we must yield to share cyber information as quickly and in as close to real time as possible. to accelerate the speed and expand the breadth of information sharing, we are taking three actions. first, we are supporting the development of information sharing and analysis organizations, as called for in the president's executive order

13691, which he signed on february 13 they share. next month, we will as directed by the president select the organization that will develop best practices. by supporting the development, we want to help companies regardless of size, location, or sector share information with their peers and with the department of homeland security. second, i have directed an aggressive schedule for deployment of next-generation information sharing techniques. dhs itself now has a system to share cyber threat indicators, and we are working to share those capabilities across the federal government and across the private sector so we can send and receive information in near real-time. one agency is already receiving cyber threat information from the automated system over a month ahead of the original

schedule. we expect multiple agencies and threat sector partners will begin sharing and receiving information through this automated system by october of this year. third, we are working closely with other agencies of our government to stand up to cyber threats, intelligence integration centers, or ccic. it provide timely a for mission to share with our partners. finally, there is more congress can do. congress has a role in cyber security to ensure that we have adequate resources and budget and the legal authority to pursue our mission. last year, in addition to passing the federal information security monitoring act, congress gave us and codified the role of nccic as a federal interface. but there is more congress can do. the recent breaches in cyber

security demonstrate years and see of acting now. we appreciate the good bipartisan work on cyber security legislation now underway in congress. we believe there should be three basic things in any cyber legislation. first, congress should expressly authorize the einstein program. this would eliminate any remaining legal obstacles to its deployment across federal government. the house has passed hr1731, which accomplishes this by ensuring agencies understand they are legally permitted to disclose network traffic to dhs for narrowly tailored purposes. second, we must incentivize the private sector to share in a manner that provides protection from civil and criminal liability for private entities

that share threat indicators with us and protects privacy. third, we need a national data breach reporting system in lieu of the patchwork, and enhanced criminal penalties for cybercrime. meantime, we're moving forward. as we improve our defenses cyber adversaries will continue to improve their own efforts to break through. this problem is not unique to the government. it is shared across the global cyber security community. our adversaries are constantly evolving. so most articles to combat them. we cannot detect and stop every single intrusion. that is not news. so often the most sophisticated actors penetrate the gate

because they know they can count on a single user letting his guard down in an active spearfishing. but my message today as we have increased and will continue to increase the instances in which attempted intrusions are either stopped at the gate or rooted out from inside the system before they cause damage. we are taking action. we are aggressively strengthening our defenses. we are accelerating the deployment of the tools we have an working to bring new ones online. thank you very much. [applause] mr. o'keefe: thank you, sir. appreciate that. secretary johnson: thank you mr. secretary. mr. o'keefe: thank you, mr. secretary. secretary johnson: secretary of the navy is a lot cooler job. i did not have aircraft carriers.

sean, can i take a liberty and recognize the admiral and director? i saw your portrait. thank you for being here. mr. o'keefe: outstanding. it's a great pleasure to see you. thank you wall for being here. it was a next ordinary commentary, mr. secretary, that you offered on a variety of different elements of the cyber challenge. how would you characterize the nature of u.s. vulnerability right now to cyber? secretary johnson: well, what i said at the end, what amazes me when i look into a lot of

intrusions, including some really big ones, by multiple different types of actors, they very often start with the most basic active spearfishing, where somebody is allowed in the gate, penetrates the network simply because an employee clicked on something he or she should not have. the most sophisticated actors count on penetrating a system in that way. which means that a lot of our cyber security efforts have to be rooted simply an education of whatever workforce we have. second, there are some really sophisticated actors out there with varying different motives. i think we all know them. and we have right now underway what i consider a very aggressive effort to raise the

number of instances in which we are successful in blocking the efforts to infiltrate the system. as i said in my remarks, we are not where we need to be, and i have made a personal mission of getting us to raise that bar to a better place. mr. o'keefe: fascinating. part of the commentary that you offered, too, in terms of mitigating against this is to act as the primary federal department agency for the purpose of broader cooperation of information, the einstein system was the example. that has gained great coverage in the course of the opm breach. how so many of your team have testified as to how that works and how effective it is. it has been a very broad press coverage there that i think has educated the public more broadly to understand what the scope of that system is and how useful it could become. beyond the point of simply --

beyond the point of coordinating this important information, it then highlights more abilities to each federal agency, when you look at the full scope of all the federal interests that have ascribed the role in the cyber security challenge, ranging from the intelligence community and the defense department, of course, but also the treasury department, through the fbi, a wide range of agencies all have a stake in this -- how do you coordinate that wide-ranging set of efforts beyond simple information sharing? secretary johnson: that is on us to do, that is on dhs to do. you are correct there are a number of federal departments and agencies with a cyber security role. each agency and department has its own cyber security responsibility respective to its

own system. but there are a lot of federal agency departments that have a broader cyber security mission and it's on us in government, most prominently the intelligence community, dhs and fbi, and dod, to coordinate our efforts to effectively partner. dhs is the civilian interface for cyber security. fbi has the law enforcement investigative mission. the intelligence community has their mission, obviously. but the way we see it in the way we are setting this up, dhs and nccic in particular is the primary portal for the civilian private sector and the federal civilian dot-gov world. it is encouraged to effectively work with and partner with other

agencies who have a role in this process to coordinate the efforts. the nccic is essentially a multi agency and today. as i mentioned in my prepared remarks, one of the things that we are doing with considerable urgency is getting to near real-time information sharing. so when something comes in the door, we can do the proper vetting for privacy and so forth and get it out an automated fashion to the players who need the information. mr. o'keefe: and your final comment on the role of congress in this, i assume, is in part to highlight the fact that we are consistently looking for the authorities of the department of home security to direct the priorities to the appropriate challenges. is that a fair assumption as well? secretary johnson: yes. we got some cyber security

legislation last year, but there is more we can do. i'm encourage there is a lot of bipartisan support. the house passed by a wide bipartisan margin, 350 votes in the house, for a difficult subject. so i'm encouraged by that. a lot of activity right now in congress. i'm hoping we get cyber legislation. it really is to codify our legal authority and to encourage information sharing by the private sector. a very significant component of that, which the president supports is limiting potential criminal and civil liability for those who share cyber threat indicators with us. that was a big threshold across. we support it. we think it is good. from my corporate lawyer days, i know how board of directors think.

limiting liability for sharing cyber threat indicators is meant to be strong encouragement and inducement to help us in the cyber security mission for the country. mr. o'keefe: i want to follow-up on that last comment that you made, because you are far more aware of this and probably anybody. industries help us in various markets, widely diverse markets. they have been progressively making choices of our own to erect our own defenses and cyber security systems. secretary johnson: right, and they should. mr. o'keefe: before they go down the path to spend the and norma's amount of money to do that, because it is often varied and uniquely positioned, what would be your best advice to any ceo our board of directors prior to making those investments on how they all to think about going about structuring their

own defenses? secretary johnson: well, i will start with an observation. one observation is in the private sector there are companies and sectors that are very sophisticated when it comes to cyber security, then there are others in the food chain that are not. it requires a lot of learning. there are ways for some of the more sophisticated players to encourage the less sophisticated to do that. my advice would be invest in the latest and best technology. there are lots of cyber security firms out there that are in a position to advise. it are some good ones. but also, the key to cyber security, even if you have the best technology in place, is information sharing. that is where dhs can come in, that is where part of the private sector can come in and

play a role. information sharing is key, even among the most sophisticated actors. you don't want to be out there all alone. and effectively partnering within the federal government and with the federal government. those are the three tenants. mr. o'keefe: excellent, thank you. secretary johnson: one other thing i'd like to add, sean -- mr. o'keefe: sorry. secretary johnson: you touched in your remarks about july 4. very often, in public reports, we see a lot of concern expressed about specific events emanating from statements made by us in government. but very often we don't finish reading the entire paragraph or the entire sentence. and so i gave a statement the week before july 4, and it was

consistent with many statements i've made, which is the public needs to continue to be vigilant around holidays, public events but we encourage people to continue to go to public events, celebrate the country, and not be afraid. we are a free society. as i said, we cherish the freedom to associate, the freedom to travel, and we should continue to do that. the homeland security threat is definitely there. but i don't want to see people run and hide. i don't want to see people stay in bed all day. i think we need to and should continue about our daily lives participate, support large public events. one of my best lines is terrorism cannot prevail in people who refuse to be

terrorized. i have seen just in my time in office, 18 months, when an attack occurs, americans whether oklahoma city or boston or the united states military, anyplace else, come back stronger. i think that is part of who we are as americans, and we need to continue to do that. mr. o'keefe: thank you, that's very helpful. secretary johnson: ok, turned me over to questions. mr. o'keefe: yes, ma'am? that's you. >> thanks for your speech and discussion. the u.s. and china agree to further explore initiative to carry out group communication and coordination on cyber security issues. what other initiatives is the u.s. expecting, and are there any concrete ideas for the next round of operations between the two countries and your expectations on cyber security issues, discussions in the

september visit? thank you so much. secretary johnson: i went to beijing in april. i met with a number of chinese government officials. i have encouraged us to find common ground where we can in terms of information sharing. in my time in office, we have done that to a limited extent. but it is also a work in progress. i think we have differing views on a lot of fundamental issues and a lot of fundamental understandings about the nature of cyber security. so it continues to be a work in progress, but i think that dialogue can be good and is good. mr. o'keefe: yes, sir? >> i have to agree with all your statements, especially the one about the urgency for bringing

in the latest technology especially the networks that are much more secure than the antiquated systems. my colleagues at itac have said the up to me of that is the acquisition process. can you talk to us about dhs' efforts to speed the need at removing barriers to goals? secretary johnson: the answer is, yes, we are doing that. as part of our unity of effort initiative on my watch, which i announced and created last spring, we are reforming our acquisition process. and we have an initiative to do that, to remove a lot of the barriers. part of the initiative we have taken and acquisitions is consult the private sector. in my professional life, i

actually have lived most of that professional life in the private sector as a service provider meaning a lawyer. and so we have an acquisition reform initiative underway right now. it was recently formed. we have a terrific new undersecretary for management, confirmed by the senate of a vote of 95-2, who was my former client. he used to be the executive vice president for administration at johnson & johnson. in many ways, they resemble dhs. it is a large, decentralized conglomerate of health care companies. russ was the vp for administration and oversaw a lot of their aspects of their business. so he is with us now, out of retirement to take this job. acquisition reform is part of his mission.

mr. o'keefe: yes, please, sir? >> a number of officials have identified the gps signal. could you tell us about gps and the efforts to limit the vulnerability? >> that is a good question. i am not an expert on that particular topic. i do know that we spend a lot of time, we have an assistant secretary for critical infrastructure and we spend a lot of time interfacing with critical infrastructure and those businesses we consider critical infrastructure on single points of failure and the like. we are in a collaborative discussion and exercise with critical infrastructure on these types of vulnerabilities.

>> yes, sir, way in the back. >> as you mentioned dhs has the responsibility for protecting the.gov, especially it is prevalent in light of the opm breach. what would you say in terms of the authorities that you have? in terms of the department's ability to implement countermeasures issued directives to agencies you might not be up to the minimum standards -- >> legally, each agency and department head has the responsibility for their own system. legally. i stress that to my colleagues. we have the responsibility for the overall protection of the federal civilian.gov world.

and as i see it and as we see it, where we need help in protecting federal cyber security is legal

the only thing i can say is that there are many different factors that go into whether you are at a point in which you can and should identify the actors you think hacked you. as i said in my statement, we have a leading subject but we are not prepared who that is. the sony situation is a different type of situation. in many other it was a different type

of episode. >> i am from the council of scientific society presents. can we clarify what constitutes the difference between somebody from outside the country and we consider this an act of war versus somebody coming in the same day doing more damage but in the cyber realm. are we going to leave this gray area undone, or are we going to do something concrete about it?

it is more important the response be proportionate, not necessarily of the same kind but proportionate. i don't know if we need an act of war to respond proportionally to it.

>> i had the privilege of working with arts of brow ski -- zebrowski. what's your relation to cyber? does it affect all of government or just you. we were buying aircraft carriers. >> are acquisition reform was for dhs. >> you haven't done it for all of government? >> the whole question is all of government is part of it. >> when it comes to cyber security we recommend various

tools and i think we sometimes even buy them for them but that's in the realm of cyber security. if you're asking about dod acquisitions, don't get me started. that's a different story. >> think about the size and the times and for people to understand what the costs are going to be as things get better and you have to keep repeating it. >> there are smart ways to do acquisition in my view. i'm a big believer in not necessarily going with the biggest and most expensive tool. sometimes the actor who is a little leaner can do a better job.

my department is only 12 years old. in many respects we are stove piped. ask a final question.

anne: i have experienced both systems. you mentioned gateways and how people tried to intrude upon various gateways. there are numerous attempts at spearfishing. >> if they're not, they probably should be. that's the answer to the question. >> thank you very much for being with us.

[applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> on the next washington journal, republican congressman on efforts to reform the no child left kind act and other education issues before congress. -- left behind act and other

items before congress. washington journal is live each morning. >> the millennial generation and how the parties are vying for the crucial voting block. >> it used to be folks were focused on television, so political advertising became focused on ads.

if you look at what things are going to look at. -- to look like, there is always something new popping up. >> sunday night at eight eastern. >> new encryption technologies and the challenge they pose to law enforcement and counterterrorism operations. this hearing is just under two hours.

>> good afternoon. i would like to welcome our witness. i know the vice chair had an opportunity to take a bite at you but wanted one more. as we often conduct hearings and closed session, i would like to take the opportunity to thank the director for their efforts

in keeping us safe. our nations enjoyed peaceful and a safe independence they celebrations this past weekend. as you are well aware extremists remain intent on inflicting harm at u.s. interest at home and abroad. we have witnessed the islamic state of iraq and isil attempt to get individuals to conduct attacks. the number of attempting attacks has exceeded the combined number

in 2013 and in 2014. threats facing our nation are not limited to terrorist actors. -- the fbi is continually challenged by the capabilities employed by the nationstate actors. in addition to these issues, the fbi conducts robbery, murder and the list goes on and on. these issues that might appear unrelated are closely linked.

they require an enabling technology. in both cases, the enabling technology is increasingly secure communications. this falls at the intersection

of freedom, law, and security. these are designed so only the user has the key. and these cases when any agency requires a lawful warning, it is an accessible. law enforcement is blind and becoming so, and as a result, we are less safe. i desire privacy. we are guaranteed rights to pursue the fourth amendment and are affect. -- our effects. i am concerned about other criminal threats.

we must identify a solution that protects american privacy but also allows for lawful searches under court orders. you said the encryption is equivalent to a closet that can't be opened or a safe that can't be cracked. you have had an opportunity to speak to the committee and the american people and to convince us in order to keep the american people safe, you need to be able to crack the safe. there are no easy answers, and we are conducting a robust debate i think that was initiated by you. you wrote on monday part of your job is to make sure the debate is informed. i look forward to this discussion, and i appreciate

your being here. i would like to ask unanimous consent to enter several things to the record. the second letter on the topic of this hearing. the third is a letter dated july 8, 2015 to this committee on the topic of the hearing. the fourth is a transcript dated october 16, 2014. without objection, those documents will be entered into the record. i turned to the vice chairman for any remarks. >> thank you for holding this hearing.

there was a crowded hearing, and i think the number of people here today is evidence. i thank you for holding this hearing. i want to thank you for unparalleled service to protect this country and disrupt and prevent attacks. last month there were arrests almost every day as the bureau worked to thwart attacks. counterterrorism has been at the top of the priority list since 9/11. john carlin said last week in

london that the united states government was running hundreds of counterterrorism investigations. in addition to the growth in the number of terrorist incidents, the nature of the threat has changed significantly. hundreds and perhaps thousands of americans here at home are in contact with officials. i have been concerned about use for the internet to inspire terrorism inside. i believe the united states

companies, headquartered in my home state have an obligation to do everything they can to ensure . last week i made a lengthy feature into the united -- into the new york times. it described in detail how isil members used twitter and other services to recruit a young woman for months to support a militant brand of islam and tried to get her to marry and travel to syria. as noted, the terrorist has direct access to the united states.

they have for they need to protect the people of this country. this committee has heard from the fbi, the national security issue, and the counterterrorism center about how terrorist groups have moved forms of communication that are harder or impossible to access. the increased use of encryption has exacerbated this trend. i understand the need to protect records. encryption is one way of doing

so. especially in this area of cyber penetration, and our private sectors. encryption is an important safeguard. that doesn't mean that companies should configure their services in a way that denies them the ability to respond to a court warrant, or a similar legal process from the government. this is not a theoretical issue. the fbi has briefed this committee and cases where it knows of communications involving ongoing terrorist movements by isil but it has no way to obtain those communications. even with a court order based on probable cause. it seems to me that if companies will not voluntarily comply with a lawful court orders for information, then they should be required to be able to do so through legislation and a way to protect security of consumer data against unauthorized access.

as director comey has said, we are not looking for a backdoor into american companies. we're looking to be able to use the front door. i welcome today's hearing and look forward to the director's testimony on the ongoing threat of terrorism against the united states, and the need to acquire lawfully, and quickly, information necessary to stop those threats from becoming real attacks. thank you very much. senator burr: thank you, vice chairman. members will be recognized for five minutes based upon the order of attendance today. i would like to remind all members that we are in an open session which is unusual. therefore i would ask you to be particularly careful in the questions you ask. i trust, director, that if you have an answer that cannot be given in an open session you

will just tell the vice-chairman and i that we will carry this over into a closed session at an appropriate time. with that, let me turn it over to you for any of your comments. director comey: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for this opportunity. i really do like the use of the word conversation. i think this is a conversation we have to happen is a country. i sometimes your people talk about the crypto wars. we are fighting those words today. i don't like that metaphor. i am not finding anything. i am not here to win anything. i am here to explain the ways in which the change in technology affect the tools the american people, through this body, have given the fbi. i think we all care about the same things.

we care deeply about the security of our information, of our health care, of our finances, of all the great things that travel over the internet. we all care about public safety. i don't see it as a war, but an opportunity to talk, and what we should do about it. i believe we stand at a reflection point. i felt, not long after i'd become director, that technology has moved to a place where encryption, which was always available, has become the default. that changes been accompanied by an explosion in apps that offer end-to-end encrypted communication. those things that put us at an inflection point. this committee knows from close sessions that the threat today

is very different. it is not the al qaeda of old. that was interested in the multi-pronged national landmark-based careful, long planned attacked. we still face the challenge. they are very different from what we see today. they wanted to post magazines and websites, if someone wanted to consume propaganda, they found the website and read the propaganda. they sent an e-mail to the magazine. here is what has change, isil thinks about their terror in a different way. they're not focused on the

national landmark. they want people to be killed in their name. they're coming to us with that message with their propaganda and their entreaties to action through twitter and other parts of social media. that is a very different thing than al qaeda ever did. they come into our country through thousands of followers of isil tweeters who are based in syria. they broadcast a message which is two pronged. one, come to the islamic state. second, if you can't come, kill someone where they are, and videotape it. police tried to kill law enforcement, and military. this message is pushed, and pushed, and pushed. social media companies are worth billions of dollars because pushing to someone's pocket

works. isil has 21,000 and language followers right now. if a devil to someone's shoulder all day and says kill, kill, kill. they're reaching, and calling and it is having an effect on troubled souls in the united states. we have disrupted justin last few weeks very serious efforts to kill people in the united states. isil will find the live ones on twitter and we can see them say here is my encrypted mobile messaging app. contact me there. so our task to find needles and a nationwide haystack becomes complicated by the fact that the needle goes invisible. we cannot break strong encryption. people watch tv and think the bureau can do a lot of things.

we cannot break strong encryption. even if i get a court order under the fourth amendment to intercept that communication, i will get nothing. the needle remains dark to me. isil does something al qaeda would never imagine, they task people. kill someone, and we will see if you're really a believer. these people react in ways that are very difficult to predict. what you saw in boston was flashed a bang being very close. you had a guy in touch and then encrypted way. he woke up one morning and decided he would go kill somebody. thank goodness we were able to