now, one has to believe and hope that the nsa, and i do actually, has cracked this problem to some degree, the attribution problems for corporations and many government agencies is a very real thing. it is a very difficult problem in this digital age. >> robert o'harrow, you write about a company called tr itium. >> it is a company in richmond that came up with an interesting idea, not long after the web browsers, back in the 1990's, or released and use of the world wide web that lays over the top of the internet. it makes it all easy and we'll take for granted and it was becoming common. what they did is they realized that the web browser could be like universal control back to iraq devices anywhere in the world that were connected to the networks. -- that could direct devices anywhere in the world. your security camera, you could use your mouse to have the security camera looked left or right. you could be sitting in washington and control the camera in san francisco. theating systems all over place. you might be controlling five buildings, high-rises, elevators, medical devices to some

now, one has to believe and hope that the nsa -- and i do, actually -- has cracked this problem to some degree. but the attribution problem for corporations, um, and many government agencies is a very real thing, a very difficult problem in this digital age of ours. >> host: robert o' harrow, you write about a series called tritium. why do you do that? >> guest: they're a company that came up with a really interesting idea not long after the web browsers back in the '90s were released and use of the worldwide web which lays over the top of the internet makes it really easy. we all take it for granted now. it was becoming common. and what they did was they realized that the web browser could be like a universal remote control that could direct devices anywhere in the world that were connected to the networks. so, for example, the security camera. you could use your mouse to have the security camera look left or look right. you could be sitting in washington and controlling a camera in san francisco. heating systems all over the place. you might be controlling five buildings, high-rises,

, and people say this too, the nsa provides technical expertise, technicalassistance. what's that mean? i think a lot of people see that, and they they homeland security is a bunch of nsa guys in your officers with their technology, and you will be the face of it, but the sort of, the guts behind the operation comes from the military. >> actually, we already work very closely with the nsa. we have people located at the nsa and with the fbi. you really have a three-legged stool. you have the nsa, which is responsible for intelligence, intelligence gathering abroad. you've got the fbi, which is often the lead when there's an actual criminal investigation going on. you've got dhs, which has the responsibility for system protection. so between myself, director of the fbi and nsa, we have people co-located, and that we are clarifying our own relationships with each other because that's the way we maximize the resources each of us brings to the table. no, we don't intend to have the nsa parked in every american's home. that's not the purpose. the purpose is to mak

one belief and hope that the nsa and i do actually has cracked this problem to some degree but the attribution problem, corporations, and many government agencies is a difficult problem in this digital age of ours. >> host: robert o'harrow in your serious you write about a company called tritium. what is that? >> guest: tritium is a company in richmond that came up with a really interesting idea not long after the web browsers were released and the use of the world wide web, which lays over the top of the internet makes it real easy and we all take it for granted now. it was becoming common. what they did was they realize the web browser could be like the universal control that could direct devices anywhere in the world that were connected to the network so for example the security camera. you could use your mouth to have the security camera look left or look right. sitting in washington and controlling the camera. heating systems all over the place. you might be controlling five buildings, high rises, elevators, medical devices to some degree and also access control for security. let's say th

the nsa picked it up. nothing was said about it. e ambassador we know from his diaries was worried about death threats and asked for security. we now know on the record they were asking for security. what bothers me and this the only thing. i don't want to use a watergate like and don't want to talk about benghazi gate for this reason, it trivializes. it four americans were killed. imagine the terror of those five hours. this is a five hour attack. had we been prepared with rapid reaction forces the ambassador would be alive today. had we been prepared by sending in marines beforehand the ambassador are would be alive today. this is much worse than water gate. nobody died at watergate and i think that it is inconceivable that the vice president of the united states would go on a national debate as he did the other night and willfully and deliberately lie to the american people and that is what he did. he knows better by now. there is no excuse now. 32 days later, there is no excuse and joe biden went out of his way to lie to the amer

the nsa picked it up. nothing was said about it. the ambassador we know from his diaries was worried about death threats and asked for security. we now know on the record they were asking for security. what bothers me and this the only thing. i don't want to use a watergate like and don't want to talk about benghazi gate for this reason, it trivializes. it four americans were killed. imagine the terror of those five hours. this is a five hour attack. had we been prepared with rapid reaction forces the ambassador would be alive today. had we been prepared by sending in marines beforehand the ambassador are would be alive today. this is much worse than water gate. nobody died at watergate and i think that it is inconceivable that the vice president of the united states would go on a national debate as he did the other night and willfully and deliberately lie to the american people and that is what he did. he knows better by now. there is no excuse now. 32 days later, there is no excuse and joe biden went out of his way to lie to the am

as the nsa director special assistant for cyber, he leaves the cyber task force. when general alexander selected dennis, he obviously knew the same things that i am about to tell you because dennis started this organization way back in early 2007 and he still is a leader. as you probably saw from when you signed upon the web to attend today's symposium, dennis is perfect for this job. he's a technical expert, he's an electrical engineer and cryptanalysis expert. in fact, he is a proud card-carrying member of what we affectionately and respectfully refer to as a crypto mafia combined with his neighbors experience serving on capitol hill within congressman robert's what does it of stuff followed by his tour with a private sector and atlantic communications. this makes him very well-rounded and diversified for this job. even before that, those that really know him will remember his musical inclination is playing drums for his high school rock'n'roll band their royal flush. when we get to the questions you can ask what that means. he also had much longer hair than he

the nsa is saying, okay, can we gather anything from the technical communications.ve all this information flying in from different directions, and it is chaotic. and you have to be very careful at the outset as to how you interpret that information. but you have to understand also that you don't just immediately take it and discard some of it and say that this may be the result of a spontaneous protest that was upset about the video. that is the part regarding a rush to go to that. you have the chaos and the various strands of information. jon: we are still six weeks out from this thing, almost, and still, they have not determined, apparently, who was responsible. should it be taking that long? >> no, it shouldn't be. this is a partner can drive you crazy. we are talking six weeks on about who did what one. what we should be talking about is why this occurred in first the first place. this occurred in the first place because that facility a year ago was not properly protected. one of those e-mails that we talked about at the outset of the program, they mentioned the

the cia, nsa, department of defense, they actually know what these attacks are at the border sometimesdon't. so business is going to have to work together in this protect the american public so we can stop cyber crime. but it is a big deal, it is going to get worse. computers in ten years are going to be 100,000 times faster and so they'll be able to do calculations quicker and get through quicker. we're going to have to meet that in every way, shape or form. believe me -- banks i think are pretty good at this. we've been doing this a long time and there are rules and regulations and -- but we have to really stay in front of it. how many of you are worried about that? don't think of just the cyber security coming over the internet to you. like everything we do, we do authenticate you. we know more about that stuff than some you think. think about the person that joins your company from inside. that's where you're going to get it. >> thank you for that re-assuring point. there is a young lady in the second to last row -- >> create internal fire walls is how you protect yourself from one

remember the nsa program and the trip to the moon. these are all federally funded programs. again, i would just say that you mischaracterized my statements once again. i said that i am for a block grant. i think that the state ought to have control. i'm not saying that washington should give the state the money. the states should have the money from washington. transportation is a governmental function, and yes, we all believe that it is a jeffersonian tradition of a limited government, and that's what we're trying to get you. and so you mentioned the lowest tax revenue and you didn't say since one, but i will tell you that there is a reason for that. the reason is because we have a lackluster economy. not enough economic activity. the wool discussion that we have had the night comes back to that. how are we going to create more economic activities. we do so by making america more competitive in the lowering taxes, giving a much more sensible regulatory environment, and yes, by repealing obamacare. these are the burdens that we have to remove. >> moderator: now it is time by

the cia, the nsa and the department of defense actually know at the border sometimes and we don't.businesses have to work together to protect the american public so we can stop cybercrime. it's going to get worse. computers in 10 years are going to be 100,000 times faster so they will be able to do calculations quicker and get through quicker and we will have to meet that in every way, shape and form. thanks i think are pretty good at this. we have been doing this a long time and our rules and regulations but we have to really stay in front of it. how many of you have you worried about at? don't think of cybersecurity coming over the internet. everything we do -- we know more about some of that stuff than you think the think about the person adjoins he joins the company from inside. that is where you are going to get it. >> thank you for that reassuring point. there is a young lady in the second to last row. >> the great internal fire is how you protect yourself. >> hi, danielle douglass from "the washington post." many of the rules coming out of dodd-frank have been written so i'm

the cia, the nsa, the department of defense, they know it's at the border sometimes come and we don't. so, the businesses have to work together in this to protect the american public so that we can stop cybercrime. but it's a big deal and it is going to get worse. computers and ten years would be faster and the calculations would get through quicker to meet that in every way, shape and form. the banks are pretty good at this. they wouldn't do this along time and all of the rules and regulations, but how many of you worry about that? it's the ciders to becoming over the internet. everything we do we know more about some of that stuff and you think but think of the person that knows your company from inside. that's what we are going to get. so. >> thank you for that reassuring point. there is a young lady in the second to the last row. >> how do you protect yourself from any one individual getting access. >> daniel douglas from the washington post. many of the rules under dodd-frank have to be written, so i'm wondering how much of an impact is the current regulatory environment having o

basically the cia and the nsa make some referrals. f they're too clumsy and that's the reason for not being able to bring successful cases you expect the white house to prioritize legislative reform. no white house has, and president clinton voted to legislation -- veto legislation, you might expect administrative enforcement to pick up the slack. shift enforcement to the administrative round where we don't have to good in front of a judge. but there's actually hardly ever any administrative sanctions against leakers. so here's what i propose -- i should give the floor -- the missing piece of discussion is the executive branch benefits from a systemic process of being permissive of leaks. that doesn't mean some leaks might not be destructive or worthy of criticism. why might that be the case? one reason is that being permissive about leaks allows you to have a more robust able to, what some journal -- journalist plant stories. if you want to make false disclosures of information from the white house, you can't be too vigorous in your c

is exactly what is in play right now and i think is what is going to go to squeak it out to the president. nsaueak because it will be a squeaker. let's not forget in all of the southwest states and a lot of pundits talking about is about how obama has built what they are calling the southwestern firewall. i'm not southwestern firewall is because of the latino vote. the kind of support president to bomb injures within the latino community has enabled them to sell that firewall. and i think what that is given and has a lot more options to get to 270, the magic number four electoral votes and what that romney right now. regardless of the momentum that romney had, regardless of all of that, president obama today enjoys a lead in the battleground states and that is because of the latino votes. it was the latina's decision that came on a couple days ago, basically saying president obama has expanded his support within the hispanic community. >> akin to thinking about the poker wishes yesterday, which is latino at is the estimate of. one of the things we have heard much throughout the election cycle

as i said people who are directly involved in helping to establish policy or running for example the nsa or cybercommand and so on getting the other two dudes as these issues and going through some scenarios. like i said that will be at the end of the month at "the washington post." >> host: as i mentioned robert o'harrow's series at "the washington post" is linked to our side at site at c-span.org/communicators. if you would like to read it for yourself and charlie miller is computer security researcher and twitter employee, also known as a good guy hacker. he has been joining us from st. louis. mr. o'harrow thank you for being on on the camp -- "the communicators." >> guest: thanks for having me. >> you can either embrace the kind of approach that congress woman wilson has embraced. she signed a pledge to support the cut, cap and balance program. that is a tea party approach to balancing the budget. it has no new revenues for even the wealthiest of americans and is so draconian that it would require deep cuts in social security and medicare over time. we can embrace a balanced approach

the vice president and others. michael hayden former c.i.a. director and former nsae former homeland security secretary michael chertoff released this statement. it's clear that any failure was not on the part of the intelligence community but on the part of white house decision-makers who should have listened to and acted on available intelligence. blaming those who put their lives on the line is not the kind of leadership this country needs. bold statements for the former intelligence folks like hayden to make in this environment. let's bring in panel. bill kristol editor of "weekly standard." kirsten powers for daily beast. syndicated columnnist charles krauthammer. bill, start with the libya and go from there in this debate. >> i think that was the great opening, great failure of joe biden in this debate. not only did he not improve what was a tenuous and tough contradictory story of the administration on what they knew about what happened in benghazi and when they knew it, he made it much worse. he is now accomplished other minor things in the debate, i suspect

the department of defense in large part through the capabilities of the national security agency, nsa, has developed the world's most sophisticated system to detect cyber intruders and attackers. we are acting aggressively to get ahead of this problem, putting in place measures to stop cyber attacks dead in their tracks. we are doing this as part of a broad whole of government effort to confront cyber threats. the department of homeland security has the lead for domestic cyber security. the fbi also has a key part to play in investigating and preventing cyber attacks. our intelligence agencies, of course, are focused on this potential threat as well. the state department is trying to forge international consensus on the roles and responsibilities of nations to help secure cyberspace. the department of defense also has a role. it is a supporting role, but it is an essential role. tonight, i want to explain what that means. first, let me make clear what it does not mean. it does not mean the department of defense will monitor citizens personal computers. we're not interested in personal

the national nsa led by the foreign prime minister came out on top of the recent elections, but he hasot of enemies and the most powerful militia from libya comes from the city. there is historical animosity between the tribe and the city. he's accusing speak of loyalists from the tribe so when the enemies block him from becoming prime minister. the party is descended from the libyan national salvation fund and major groups created in 1981. they were able to get the positions of partisan prime minister. because they were the operation party they were able to stop the cabinet with exile dissident and this angered the local parliamentarians. we also have the regional parties such as the cities were the strongest militia came from. they were not happy with the representation they got neither. so what happened, and also there were a number of gadhafi loyalists. so a lot of people said we don't know these people because they came from abroad. they are gadhafi loyalists and they don't have regional representation is and undermine and torpedo the prime minister government where they have no p

the press. i would like to hear from petraeus and nsa and other state department under oath. ink that would be instructive but the president is the leader of the country. its month and a half and i don't understand why we aren't having a press conference. >> because this guy is the ultimate duck and dodge guy. you are going to hear the department of treasury go about man who makes things happen and another man that makes things up. he won't hold a press conference unless you and others really press him. he will present scary indicate. >> bill: the whole nation would see that. the press so his side generally speaking but in a press conference, look, every agency is investigating this. los angeles times and "washington post." that situated to handle it. do you think that barack obama is going to do the bin laden card tonight? is that his strongest suit? >> it's his only suit. its call any president would have made, he delayed making the call. >> bill: romney is not going to say congratulations, i'm glad you did it. >> of course, romney can't attack him for killing bin laden. wha

reporter: believe it or not in the city of pix fis eoyser e radeut o so nsa get a cash reward but to try to help the city cut down on costs. so i guess those are the kinds of employees you hope will stick around. jenna, back to you. jenna: sounds like a very interestinidea. maybe this wul won cossdokn weseer iesfr a,nk vmu >> reporter: okay. jon: going to take you back to washington, d.c. now where chairman darrell issa has just sworn in th first of the witnesses who will testify about the ri osuraman were killed. let's listen in. >> i'm responsible for reclamation security program that oversees 58 high and siificant hazard dams in ve western states ones en cn nna icntrre li upeahe death of ambassador stevens and later the congressional inquiry, i identify myself to my congressional representative staff as a person with intimatenowledge of the security situation ior to an a dogth staff investigators. i made a personal decision to come forward with information and do not represent dod or any government agency. i had unique access and plact ygome erdgesil in l. i utun tme forward in ord

part to the capabilities of the national security agency, an essay, has developed the --, nastional security agency, nsaicated system to detect cyber intruders and attackers. we are acting aggressively to get ahead of this problem, putting in place measures to stop cyber attacks did in their tracks. we are doing this as part of a broad whole of government effort to confront cyber threats. the department of homeland security as the lead for domestic sever security. the fbi also has a key part to play in investigating and preventing cyber attacks. and our intelligence agencies, of course, are focused on this potential threat as well. the state department is trying to forge international consensus on the roles and spots -- roles and responsibilities of nations to help secure cyberspace. the department of defense also has a rule. -- a role. it is a supporting role, but he is an essential role. bentonite, i want to explain what that means. but first, let me make clear what it does not mean. it does not mean that the department of defense will monitor citizens' personal computers. we're not interested in pers

norf k sohern thoncotoe. rfsorn one ne infite psibities e fi p bies > the ar sill peoe in asry par thar s lere'someeo ngher evat nsasgo eraswhre hiereas. go we actllyableo t hi s.pizzat wctayle zz rtaurt th was openarli. th ente eahisis abo rurthas enli th nt ven eigeets ofbo the se am uff. lon s liig it'snowtg alst.fhese f. lolit'owal. ver en athinlikehis. r ainkes. at suati chaed vy fa. wee li in stiha v bury fa par weli in're obab abt 1,00 eetry or sarfrom the e babrdwab aut00et tw blo ss or somhe fm thebwa a ardwk whe we lohot orat s f hourago.he ju as was dwwhwestarng tt uro. juets as da.ar t wh angeabou an ur ter twe da s twh th i geoun r bsicay the -he sth bardwk s bcompcately b acheth by bdw mply bheter.y anateroverg th tire twblockr. areaer er wee nohw re b sicay twoc suound byeaater wenot's b acaout ist hisund byer rlie we hen't'sone at t hit thein ite me tiee bause hthe't'se ta ltthf dris hippe t bse arode inhi lwin ds ciring appund. aro l in of be nirg ad.can a l 'vef seenbe alunum sidgn and the elikee it'sgettlugmid prgty danndrous out e kthe,o r 'sttarcnornd ianus arteth basally bet ren tesewo rc vs wh

their handsets, nsa, has said they're not a threat to us. thenotion they can do end to end telecommunications, which they've done in one part of kansas already, i think is bad judgment. congressman rogers has done a huge service for the united states by raising this up as a concern. >> you know, some of the frpres reports say there are chinese communist party committees. they're little committees in all big chinese companies and that they have a secret jaent or not so secret to them. the united states companies doesn't have that. these guys do. they're still communists. does that enter yue your thinking on this? does that prove de facto we can't trust them. >> there's probably a doss left in china than about their probable connections to chinese people's liberation army cyber command. there are some allegations aalong that line. there are allegations that wawei communications do beaconing where they're signalling intelligence back from their proprietary networks back to china. there are allegations that they have bribed or tried to bribe for esp

basically the cia and nsa make some referrals. almost no other component ever does. if the fbi's act is too clumsy and that is a reason for not being able to make successful cases you'd expect some white house to prioritize legislative reform. no white house ever has, specific parts of the executive branch have made proposals of the years. president clinton vetoed a major legislation in 2000 that would have strengthened in the espionage act significantly. there has been no revisiting of the subpoena policy since 1970, even though that is a real handicap on investigators. and moreover, you might expect administrative enforcement to pick up some of the slack if it is all about how tough is to bring cases. okay. shift enforcement to the administrative robber we don't have to go in front of a judge publicly with our permission. as i suggested earlier, there is hardly ever any administration sanctions. so to me here is what i will propose provocatively in quickly at the end. i should yield the floor. the missing pieces of discussion, the executive branch benefits in variou

he was a high-level nsa official, he's now working at the apple store in bethesda. so that is a serious chilling effect, believe me, for the many people we talk to for our job. thanks. >> scott, you managed to meet the challenge. david had talked about, quoted alexander hague, scott quoted the greek philosophers, you quoted your own book. [laughter] that was really masterful. let me press back on this. you know, every time i raise this idea whether leakers need more protection, whether the prosecutions are bad the response i got from one washington reporter was leakers don't look up pentagon pape ors and decide what the -- papers and decide what the law says. they don't look up morrison, they don't look up the aipac decision by judge ellis. they're motivated by other things. they don't do that. and you look over "the new york times" over the last few days, leaks about libya and so forth, isn't david right that leaking continues on apace? >> yes, absolutely. i mean, you know, and i wouldn't even call it leaking. i would just say that it's the normal business of gover

the front. >> first of all, i don't you for inviting this form. it was an amazing forum, a great group of people you put together today. my name is scott, i am a former nsa linguist and also a u.s. air force linguist. i served my country for quite a long time. i will tell you that the country needs a big reality check. very disingenuous to say that reagan was a peaceful president. he fought two wars that i covered very closely against iran, and another war i covered a very closely -- the best way to fight your enemy is to use your enemy, and that is what we did with saddam, that is what we did with the folks in afghanistan and pakistan against the russians. we fought the russians for 10 years as well. so, that is very disingenuous. in fact, my question is, how can we continue to survive as a country? in my lifetime -- i am 50 years old this year -- we have murdered over 25 million people in this world, and loss -- lost less than 100,000 in battle. 58,000 of those were in vietnam. the fact is, we are far more warring nation than any other nation on the the history of this planet. we have killed more people. we have done some terrible things around the wor

. >> first of, thank you for inviting us into the great a group of people use the together today. i am a former nsa request and u.s. air force linguist. i served my country for quite a long time. i will tell you the country needs a big reality check. it is very disingenuous to say that ronald reagan was a peaceful president. he fought the war that i covered recklessly against iran and other i covered closely was the best way to fight your enemies to use an enemy and that is what we did with saddam and the folks in afghanistan and pakistan. we fought the russians for ten years as also that it's very disingenuous. my question is how can we continue to survive in this country. in my lifetime -- and 52 years of this year and we've murdered people in this world, we lost less than one under the thousand in battle. the 8,000 were in vietnam. the fact is we are far more in war in dinham aver on the nation. we've killed more people and we've done terrible things around the world and i feel that is disingenuous to sit in front of a crowd and mislead them about the kind of nation that we have become. we have

lawmakers on capitol hill pressed for answers on the terrorist attack in libya which happened one month ago. while we were told it was a spontaneous protest. former nsa of the testimony yesterday. do you believe that we're seeing a cover-up to the actual terrorist attack that killed four americans? >> brian, i wouldn't use the word cover-up. there has certainly been inconsistency. let's assume those first intelligence reports, we now know them to be wrong -- said this was spontaneous and video related. and i assume the administration grabbed that thing like my grandkids grab a teddy bear because it was a convenient story for their broader political narrative. but underneath that political story, i think the intelligence begins to change rather quickly. so the real question is, why does the public position of the administration continue with the original story even though you've got these other string of information cop not guilty challenging the original premise. >> brian: here is what reporter said who had your job as c.i.a. director. it's not conceivable that the oval office did not know what was going on which begs the question, why was the hoax a

the front. >> -- this gentleman in front spent first of all, thank you for providing this forum. a great group of people you put together here today. my name is scott. i'm a former nsa linguist and also a u.s. air force linguist, i served my country for quite a long time. i will tell you that the country needs a big reality check. very disingenuous to say that reagan was a peaceful president. he fought two wars that i cover very closely against iran and another work that i cover very closely against -- the best way to fight your enemy is to use your enemy. that's what we did with saddam and guys like, folks in afghanistan and pakistan against the russian. we thought the russians for 10 years as well. so that's very disingenuous. in fact, my question is how can we continue to define this country? i'm 50. we've murdered over 25 million people in this world and lost less than 100,000 battle. 58,000 of those were in vietnam. the fact is that if we are far more boring nation than any other nation on the history of this plan. we have killed more people and what doesn't terrible things around the world. and i feel it's disingenuous to sit in front of the crowd and mislead