RT @JamesUrbaniak: So nice that the Presidents have a day, they always have such a hard time of it.

RT @jmartpolitico: Via @latimesrainey “Game Change” movie has a new nugget confirmed by Schmidt: Palin thot UK gov’t run by the queen &g …

SAN JOSE, CA–(Marketwire -02/16/12)- RAE Systems Inc., a leading developer of gas and radiation detectors for oil and gas, first responders, industrial safety, homeland security, and environmental remediation, today announced that it has appointed Vikram (“Vic”) Verma to its board of directors.

Mr. Verma, a recognized veteran of the technology industry, is currently the president of strategic venture development for Lockheed Martin (“LM”), where he is responsible for identifying and exploiting commercial market opportunities and new business models for existing LM technologies, programs and non-core businesses. Previously, Mr. Verma was chief executive officer of Savi Technology, Inc., a leader in RFID-based tracking and security solutions and a pioneer in managed service offerings for government and commercial logistics applications. Savi was acquired by LM in 2006. As with gas detection provider RAE Systems, Vector Capital was the lead investor in Savi.

Mr. Verma has been granted eight patents and, in 1994, his Direction Finding Tag product was recognized as the “Most Innovative Technology Developed by a Small Business” by The White House Office of Science and Technology. He has received numerous other accolades, including being named one of 40 “Technology Pioneers” by the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland in 2003.

“At a time when RAE Systems continues to innovate aggressively and identify new markets for the expanded growth of its gas sensors and radiation detectors, Vic’s appointment is a strategic asset that complements the company’s goals,” said Robert Chen, chairman and chief executive officer of RAE Systems. “His experience in developing marketing opportunities and innovations in supply chain management will be particularly valuable to RAE Systems as we take our growth to the next level.”

“RAE Systems has demonstrated proven leadership in delivery of world-class wireless gas sensors and radiation detection monitors to an outstanding customer base, and is well-positioned for dynamic future growth,” said Mr. Verma. “This wireless technology leadership coupled with the company’s sales growth in 2011 and strong distribution channels are a solid base to drive RAE Systems’ future growth in 2012. Together with the executive team, I am enthused about the opportunity of providing strategic leadership to guide the company’s future growth.”

About RAE Systems Inc.
RAE Systems innovates, designs and manufacturers gas sensors and radiation detectors. The company offers a full line of fixed gas detection and portable gas detection solutions, including handheld and personal chemical, compound and radiation detection instruments. RAE Systems’ proven real-time safety and threat detection systems have been deployed by world leaders in the oil and gas, fire and hazmat, industrial safety, national security and environmental markets, helping save lives and maintain safety in 120 countries. The company’s industry-leading gas sensors and radiation detection solutions are widely recognized for their performance and reliability. RAE Systems is based in Silicon Valley. Learn more at http://www.raesystems.com.

Yahoo WH reporter @OKnox doing live-chat on Facebook. Ask him your awkward questions here: http://t.co/zwtjzKAL

RT @ElYuma: AP investigation gives definitive account of what jailed contractor Alan Gross was really doing in #Cuba http://t.co/gowu88qD

The FBI is taking a tough line on cloud vendors looking to do business with U.S. law enforcement agencies, saying Tuesday that there would be no compromise in its new rule that all such services comply with the agency’s Criminal Justice Information Systems (CJIS) security requirements.

The FBI knows some vendors may have a tough time meeting those requirements, but it says that’s the price of doing business with federal law enforcement, Computerworld‘s Jaikumar Vijayan reports.

“The FBI remains committed to using technology in its information-sharing processes, but not at the sacrifice of the security of the information with which it has been entrusted,” Stephen Fischer Jr., a spokesman for the FBI’s CJIS division, said on Tuesday in an e-mail to Computerworld.

The move follows the Los Angeles Police Department dropping Google Apps two months ago because it could not comply with the CJIS requirements.

The LAPD and the city attorney’s office ultimately decided, some two years after deciding to move their e-mail systems to the cloud in order to save costs, that no cloud computing solution is really compatible with the federal security guidelines that the departments are required to follow, Cloudline’s Jon Stokes wrote at the time.

“It will be difficult for law enforcement to move to a cloud solution until the [security requirements] and cloud are more in line with each other,” LAPD’s CIO told the Los Angeles Times at the time.

There does seem to be a case the the CJIS requirements are unreasonable; that is, beyond the scope of in-house services. Jon Stokes wrote at the time of the LAPD decision to drop Google Apps:

In my coverage of cloud over the past quarter, I’ve observed a growing consensus in the private sector that cloud e-mail providers see more attacks, are better informed, and have more money to spend on security than any one enterprise. The main security concern that’s consistently raised is the Patriot Act issue, but other than that, cloud typically turns out to be more secure than on-premises e-mail. So while I’m not familiar with the specifics of the LAPD’s on-premises Novell system, unless they have a monster of a budget for security and regular penetration testing, it’s quite likely that a cloud-based e-mail and collaboration from one of the major vendors is more secure against hacking attempts.

The FBI’s Fischer questions the position that the CJIS security rules are incompatible with cloud services. ”The CJIS Security Policy is a cloud-compatible policy,” that was fully vetted and approved by local, state, tribal and federal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and Canada, he told Computerworld on Tuesday. But he acknowledged, “the requirements may be tough for some vendors to meet.”

There are cloud vendors who do meet the CJIS requirements, namely using secure data centers staffed by people who have undergone FBI background checks. The Computerworld report cites InterAct Public Safety, Datamaxx, and Vertical Computer Services as cloud companies who meet the requirement.

And the FBI has made meeting the requirements easier for cloud vendors, one analyst told Computerworld.

“The old requirements were written before cloud computing took off,” said Jeff Gould, CEO of IT consulting firm Peerstone Research. “CJIS 5.0 goes out of its way to make room for cloud vendors.”

Photo: Flickr/cliff1066™

Have your say in the comments section, below: Is Google right? Are the FBI rules too strict?

]]> http://house-security-systems.net/house-security-systems/fbi-puts-cloud-providers-on-notice-over-security-rules/feed/ 0 http://house-security-systems.net/house-security-systems/now-the-home-security-systems-designed-and-installed-by-elite-security-services-to-include-adt-yard-signs-and-decals/ http://house-security-systems.net/house-security-systems/now-the-home-security-systems-designed-and-installed-by-elite-security-services-to-include-adt-yard-signs-and-decals/#comments Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:20:00 +0000 rich http://house-security-systems.net/house-security-systems/now-the-home-security-systems-designed-and-installed-by-elite-security-services-to-include-adt-yard-signs-and-decals/

’16 watch RT: @timkaine Great to have Big Sky Country’s @BrianSchweitzer at the 2012 JJ Dinner! http://t.co/9ts2t810

Cybersecurity experts on Wednesday warned members of a House subcommittee against racing to legislation that would establish an overly burdensome regulatory framework for safeguarding digital systems against attacks, instead urging a more limited approach that would clear away legal impediments such as the prohibitions against sharing critical threat information.

Most, though not all, of the witnesses testified in favor of a strictly limited federal approach to cybersecurity, one that would be light on regulation while focusing on incentives and coordination across the private sector and with government agencies.

Several panelists and some lawmakers expressed the concern that prescriptive regulation in such a rapidly evolving sector as cybersecurity would threaten to hobble the development of new defense mechanisms as companies grapple with an additional set of compliance requirements.

“Traditional approaches, including federal regulation, will not solve the problem because they’re going to be largely reactive and will not stay ahead of the changing threat nature,” Larry Clinton, president and CEO of the Internet Security Alliance, told members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s communications and technology subcommittee.

“Worse, to add regulation would be counterproductive, leading companies to expend their limited resources on building in-house efforts to meet regulatory demands rather than focusing on security,” Clinton added.

Debate Looms as Senate Wraps Up Bill

The House hearing comes as the latest step in the run-up to what could become a major debate in Washington, as members of the Senate put the finishing touches on what is expected to be a comprehensive overhaul of the policy framework for the nation’s cyber defenses. That bill would likely vest the Department of Homeland Security with limited regulatory oversight of critical infrastructure operators, among other provisions. Majority Leader Harry Reid has signaled his intention to put the legislation on the fast track for a floor debate in the Senate.

The lone advocate of a comprehensive approach at Wednesday’s hearing was James Lewis, director of the Technology and Public Policy Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“The central problem for the U.S. will be redefining the role of government,” Lewis said in his written testimony. “There are clearly areas where the government should not interfere. At the same time, cybersecurity is a national security problem that requires more government involvement, not less.”

The House Takes a Different Approach>/h3>

In contrast with the Senate, the House is taking a more piecemeal approach, with various small-scale bills working their way through the committees of jurisdiction. One piece of legislation that emerged from the Intelligence Committee drew praise from some of the witnesses for its narrow focus on clearing away the legal obstacles to sharing information about threats.

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act would remove antitrust restrictions to allow private companies to coordinate their defense strategies. Additionally, the bill would authorize government intelligence authorities to share information about critical threats with certain industry stakeholders who had obtained appropriate security clearances, a provision that would seek to rectify the imbalance in the flow of information between the public and private sectors that many business leaders have identified.

“I’m tired of it being a one-way street to intelligence with nothing in return,” said Bill Conner, president and CEO of security software vendor Entrust.

The intelligence sharing bill would also include provisions to create incentives for private firms to improve their cybersecurity posture without imposing new regulations. Companies that could demonstrate their good-faith participation in information-sharing programs and the implementation of certain security measures would enjoy a shield from legal liability in the event of a successful attack.

Those types of steps could go a long way toward bringing cybersecurity into alignment with a private business’s commercial interests, a disconnect that continues to result in many firms taking a lax approach toward security, according to Robert Dix, vice president of government affairs and critical infrastructure protection with networking-equipment provider Juniper Networks.

“If we focus only on technology and technology development, we are likely to miss the opportunity to examine the challenges and impediments to technology and solution adoption,” said Dix, an opponent of any broad legislative mandate that would implement new regulations. “The market is delivering innovation at an unprecedented pace in history. However, the evidence would suggest that adoption of available solutions has not kept pace.”

For Lewis of CSIS, incentives are an integral part of the solution that could take the form of tax breaks or subsidies for private-sector firms to bolster their defenses, but regulation, in certain cases, will be a necessary policy lever.

“There’s straightforward evidence that what we’re doing now isn’t working,” he told the panel.

Lewis was quick to note that the heightened regulation he envisions would not a one-size-fits-all prescription, and that industries such as telecommunications providers, which he credited with having done a good job of protecting themselves. Other sectors, meanwhile, are in “bad shape,” he said, a threat that looms large over all the interrelated sectors of the economy. “An unregulated internet is not a substitute for a friendly business environment,” he said.

“This is a place where we don’t want the government creating the technology,” Lewis added, “but you [might] want it coordinating a response.” Kenneth Corbin is a Washington, D.C.-based writer who covers government and regulatory issues for CIO.com.

Read more about government in CIO’s Government Drilldown.

Special one day sale for “270 to Win” iPad app…
http://t.co/nYqr2LjH