or opm inc.. it still has all of those responsibilities that congress has begin them. >> if i could probably give an example of how we think this is going to add some efficiency. within opm right now, within hrs which is what we're contemplating bringing to gsa, there is a group that does telework policy. within gsa, we actually provide the space, and we can help consolidate the space to help with telework and provide the i.t. and systems that provide for it. by having those groups closely aligned and working together, we think -- >> emily, do you think you can do this piece without legislative, without congressional approval? >> it's my understanding we can do the transfer without legislative approval, but i don't know -- i know our lawyers are still working at it, and i don't want to speak definitively, 100%, but it's our understanding we can make this happen. >> large part i think we can do this administratively. there are some things that our lawyers are taking a look at. there's certain autho

doing when it comes to cybersecurity, that they never responded, never retaliated for the attacks on opmart of the federal government personnel database. they have never reacted as far as we know to so many attacks on utilities, corporate america and never identified definitively who carried out those attacks. >> well lou, the reason they might not have identified the opm problem is because mrs. clinton was in office during that time as i recall and was traveling around the world with her insecure blackberry and e-mail account. so it is entirely possible that the russians and chinese have access to all kinds of government databases and information through her unsecure server. i think that would explain a lot. lou:.may well explain it. it does not explain why this country has decided to give president obama -- i mean, to the country has decided to give president obama a pass. in a retaliation for meddling in the 2016 election. the retaliation whatsoever or holding accountable any official of the democratic national committee or the hillary clinton campaign who were obviously conspiring to

and still going stg.ron >>>th e u.s.en opme mont srkg inrocontversy wt( ahen alem eaypler treated difeflyrentin. wh aatal loc manid sa and did t1 a passingyc biclisth tatot g hi] rear wstedhi cleasamerer we rog.llin nes wll4 wi be right back. >>uernde1 arrest. a local musicea tcher fgacin child xse xdhacrg.es theon cneiocthe has to a local chh,urc awes ll.xdÑiñrjf 12ñrne o d ayrafte wnnithing e poop.nent g >theñryo mar n i sd.c.peinak tothe e1kiredsns. >> "news 4 today"i]ta s rtsnow. >> > aho wteek for the. d.cea ar couentins isth mog.rnin oomod g.rnin mcomute. but let'she cck in with stytll and the forecast. f.ee nmed so rieel >weo. de1xdçó th watnas ag ulyay d to rheac 06 deeegrs

sounds like you embrace that one problem you have now with this whole industry, you need to define opmsat was the other one? >> to you. >> which sounded to me like a good idea. folks don't know, that's where a harvard wants to get an online course going, so they get someone else to do all the front-end work for getting online, right? >> that's right. >> but you think the middle men are making too much money at this point >> it looks that way >> even though you were one of the middlemen. >> i was the big middleman looking over the past couple of years, the big problem in higher ed is cost the online program managers are raising the costs of higher ed it's about 20% more expensive to study online than on campus. it's got to be the only industry where tech has made things more expensive. >> that's counter intuitive. you think it's because the middlemen are charging way too much >> i think so. ten years ago it cost $15 million per program, and it was high-risk. could we build an online program that was good and could anybody take it? now it's 2$2.5 million, 30% of the students getting their

google that the data and it isn't a surprise we have seen incredibly large data set last years like the opm or yahoo or the other credit companies that mindful that data set will while me nothing critical can be with a very significant growth of artificial intelligence capability which then gives what we talked about in three or five years to make yes you mentioned mr. chertoff on misinformation and the answer is true we should be mindful because the frustrating thing is there is an old saying the last is true we should be mindful because the frustrating thing is there is an old saying the last half way around the world before the truth puts on so to be open mike that we are also taking a hit at the front end. but we have faith that will prevail in the end. thank you very - senator are you ready? >> it is a privilege to be at such an important hearing today and in your written testimony paid that future viability of the internet as a platform for commerce and social good on that security with the long-term stability and cyberspace. i share your belief and importance of cybersecurity and cyb

senator cornyn: what i was thinking about the vulnerabilities that the government has, i think about the opm hack, which exposed aliens of records, including -- millions of records, including clearances,ecurity which our adversaries would love to have that detailed information about american citizens that are working for the intelligence community or in national security posts. dr. lewis, how big a challenge is the attribution problem? that came up a little bit because if we are going to shoot back, we need to know who we are shooting at, i assume. dr. lewis: thank you, senator, and we are in a new kind of conflict, so if we were to fight world war ii war the war we expected in the cold war, we would win with hands down. our adversaries have figured that out and they are using new kinds way to diminish us, to damage the united states. and the bill you shepherded through congress is an example of what we beat the about now for this new kind of conflict and the new challenges we will get from our opponents. attribution is not a big problem. it is less of a problem than it has been. it is seen

and it's not a surprise that we've seen some incredibly large data center the last few years like the opmthat, yahoo, not expedia, one of the other credit companies i think we need to be mindful that these kinds of data that's while they may not seem that critical can be feeding a very significant growth in artificial intelligence capability which may be what we're talking about and can mean like this in five years. >> you mentioned mister chertoff on the misinformation and the answer is truth. we should be mindful because the frustrating thing is there's an old saying in the west, alive halfway around the world before the truth on its boots so we need to realize by being open like that, we are also taking a at the front end but we have faith that it will prevail in the end, that the truth will prevail. thank you very much. >> well, senator marty, are you ready? let's jump in front of senator cantwell. >> it's a privilege to be at such an important hearing today and mister painter, in your written testimony you state the viability of the internet and social good hands on platforms securit

it's not a surprise that we've seen some incredibly large data thefts in the last few years, like the opm theft, yahoo! not expedia -- one of the other credit companies, but i think that we need to be mindful that these kinds of data thefts, while they may not seem that critical actually can be feeding a very significant growth in artificial intelligence capability, which may be what we're talking about in a committee like this in five years. >> yeah. the-- you mentioned, mr. chertoff, on the misinformation and the answers truth, that we should be mindful because the frustrating thing is there's an old saying in the west, a lie gets halfway around the world before the truth puts on its boots. so we need to realize by being open like that, we're also taking a hit at the front end, but we have faith that it will prevail in the end, that the truth will prevail. thank you very much. thanks to the panel. >> well, do you want to talk? >> senator, are you ready? >> read to go. >> jump in front of senator cantwell. >> it's a privilege to be at such an important hearing today and mr. painter, if y

i was think about the vulnerabilities the federal government has, i was thinking of things like the opm hack which expose millions of records including background investigations by people who get security clearances which i'm sure our adversaries would love to have that sort of biographical and detailed information about american citizens that are working for the intelligence community or in national security posts. dr. lewis, how big a challenge the attribution problem? i know they came up a little bit, as if we're going to shoot back we need to know who we are shooting at, i assume. >> thank you, senator, let me say we're in a new kind of conflict, and so if we were to fight world war ii or the war we expected in the cold war, we would win hands down. our adversaries have figured that out and they're using you kinds of ways to diminish us, to damage the united states. the bill that you shepherded through congress is i think an example of what we need to think about now for this new kind of conflict and new challenges will get from ourt opponents. attribution is not a big problem. it's

opm one was really important thousands of people top secret security clearances stole their informationthem. me and my husband were former government employees we got the letter. steve: they stole data on undersea warfare data as well. meanwhile what about north korea? >> the north koreans are also incredibly so he 50's at this indicated in cyber espionage as well. we talk about nuclear weapons. icbms also very important. whenever the sony hack came out that was the first time the public learned about how sophisticated the north koreans actually are in cyber attacks. individual companies in america you have to have systems to protect against hacking. but we really need -- what we need to do is the chinese have not paid the public price from what they have been doing for us for 10 or 20 years as it relates to hacking our government and hacking our businesses. they -- i'm sure that the u.s. government has done things behind the scenes. but there has been nothing public. i thought vice president pence's announcement yesterday was so important about taking the stuff on publicly and drawing