Obama’s Cybersecurity Plan Urges Companies to Help

Your next video will start in

Recommended Videos

  • Info

  • Comments


Feb. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Bloomberg White House correspondent Phil Mattingly and Ken Bentsen, president and CEO of SIFMA examine the Obama Administration’s cybersecurity plan on Bloomberg Television’s “Bloomberg West.”


Is this going to change the game?

Rex it depends on who you ask.

This is a nice start but it's not anything that's really going to change the game as it currently stands.

What they are putting out here's a group of best actresses and places where people can communicate and try to counter these cyber attacks, but you get the key point.

Missing from this document today are incentives to get big companies like the banks who are members of 10's organization to want to come in and participate.

They have to be careful about information sharing and legal liability.

Until that is addressed, it will be difficult for these companies to jump all in.

What kind of incentives are you looking for?

I would be a little more robust, not to contradict him, but we think this is a good step on the part of the administration and certainly there is more that needs to be done, including acts -- actions congress needs to take.

The financial services industry has spent a tremendous amount of money developing systems and protections.

We know there is more to be done because we are only as strong as our weakest link will stop this will begin to spur, not just looking at the financial sector but across all sectors where we think there's more work that has to be done.

We think it is a positive development.

The financial industry sees the least amount of successful hacking against it.

What does the financial business understand, whether its target or yahoo!, people who have had issues with hacking?

We do not represent the consumer financial area, we look at it from a markets perspective.

There are so many ways to come into the system and you are only as strong as your weakest link.

What has happened with target and neiman marcus indicates that there are risk and we think it needs to be a top priority for the administration, a top priority for congress, and a top ready for our members and organizations.

Is a really the responsibility of the federal government to give a company like target to make their network more secure?

Shouldn't they make that a priority?

You would think, if they have enough incentive, companies would look at what happened to target and neiman marcus, they've got plenty of incentives, but they might need guidance from the white house.

How are companies like target effort from utilities, different from financial services companies?

That's an interesting question.

In the grand scheme of things, the administration views it right now as very similar.

As long as there is a weak link, their major problems.

Especially with what happened over the last couple of weeks, it may be a leading indicator of not only have these attacks been bad for a long time, but perhaps they are getting worse and if members of congress, if they can't find some kind of legislative fix, a key component that's not fixed, these problems will just continue to snowball.

What you see with target, neiman marcus and the retailers here is that people are pointing at it and saying as long as these week links exists, we have major problems systemwide.

You have run experiments where you are testing out a nightmare scenario.

You call it quantum dawned to.

What's the nightmare scenario.

What did you learn?

We have done quantum gone one and two and will do another in a couple of years.

They are working with the treasury department and our department across the financial services industry.

We look at what the cyber attack on the equity markets would look like.

To the point you have to close down the markets.

It's about the need for better coordination between the industry and our regulators, the need for better information sharing between industry participants, market participants and participants in the government and markets as well.

Some of that is where congress can come help and provide liability protection.

If you are sharing information about a counterparty, that they don't trip other regulatory rules out there.

We look at it as let's make sure we are all talking and importantly, not just in the financial services industry but other sectors downstream and the utility sector.

We need to be seeing more engagement and activity.

With the lack of policy movement, is this a symbol of the toothless miss of the white house where it offers suggestions because is not offering legislation?

I think this is as much as they can do.

It is fairly robust.

They have a bunch of different agencies, the department of energy and department of congress and the white house are working on these guidelines and they worked with hundreds of companies to police standards together.

When you get a positive response , they're doing something right but in a divided congress, a white house that doesn't necessarily it along with any of the people in the house republican leadership right now, there's not a lot legislatively that you can do.

Until there is some dynamic shift, it's going to be like

This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.


BTV Channel Finder


ZIP is required for U.S. locations

Bloomberg Television in   change