Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States Security

A New Jam-Packed Biden Executive Order Tackles Cybersecurity, AI, and More (wired.com) 127

U.S. President Joe Biden has issued a comprehensive cybersecurity executive order, four days before leaving office, mandating improvements to government network monitoring, software procurement, AI usage, and foreign hacker penalties.

The 40-page directive aims to leverage AI's security benefits, implement digital identities for citizens, and address vulnerabilities that have allowed Chinese and Russian intrusions into U.S. government systems. It requires software vendors to prove secure development practices and gives the Commerce Department eight months to establish mandatory cybersecurity standards for government contractors.

A New Jam-Packed Biden Executive Order Tackles Cybersecurity, AI, and More

Comments Filter:
  • wait... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SeaFox ( 739806 ) on Thursday January 16, 2025 @12:04PM (#65093861)

    ...implement digital identities for citizens...

    Not sure how I feel about that one.

    • Re: wait... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Thursday January 16, 2025 @12:13PM (#65093897) Homepage Journal

      They already exist so I just want to know what that means.

      Governments love making up more ID numbers. One person could have a SSN, ITIN, Passport number, ID/DL number, MBI, HIC, and CIN. And that's without even leaving the state they were born in.

      • And they're all on the darkweb and in China's databases.

        People (not you, just in general) need to stop pretending our ear-tag serial numbers are secrets.

      • by narcc ( 412956 )

        You make it sound like government agencies make up ID numbers for fun. You should know as well as anyone how difficult it is to keep track of a large number of people without issuing ID numbers. I'd be willing to bet you also have a pretty good idea about why different organizations would want or need to issue their own and why we don't just use SSN or ITIN everywhere.

        -- John Smith, New York, NY

      • I want the system to be secure by design. I didn't assume it was 'yet another standard' like you mention, but a replacement that would work online securely and effectively.

        I keep thinking the it's dumb we don't have an officially required online identity method beyond 'tell me that secrete everyone else already knows' or 'the thing you wrote down and forgot, but hackers recorded automatically'.

    • Re:wait... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by echo123 ( 1266692 ) on Thursday January 16, 2025 @12:40PM (#65093949)

      ...implement digital identities for citizens...

      Not sure how I feel about that one.

      I think Biden is referring to greater investment in login.gov and id.me, both of which are used to securely log into US Federal government systems. Other countries have the same thing. Secure digital IDs are like a passport now. The Netherlands' version is called DigID.

      My passport is from 2016 and even though I have to renew within a year, it still has a RFID chip. This is just an evolution.

      • by narcc ( 412956 )

        id.me is a private company. Every dollar they grift in profit is a dollar of taxpayer money wasted.

    • Then what? What’s the next step in your nefarious plan? SSN should never be used as an ID.

    • If you think this is questionable (which some of these orders are) wait until Trump gets a hold of them. He's already tasking some congressman in New Jersey to write up an executive order banning off shore wind https://apnews.com/article/tru... [apnews.com] . Thanks in advanced for protecting America from green energy Trump!

      I hope all these people's children and grand children who buy into this garbage remember their actions decades from now every time they think about how their quality of life has been diminished by gl

      • Thanks in advanced for protecting America from green energy Trump!

        As further proof this is nothing more than political posturing, we're stuck with refrigerators that can literally explode [wftv.com] due to genuinely overzealous climate legislation, but the incoming administration hasn't said a peep about that. I'd be thrilled to see that idiocy rolled back, since we're talking something that only contributes roughly 2% to 4% of total CO2 equivalent greenhouse gas emissions, but nope, the switch to flammable low GWP refrigerants just never really gave the right wing the same sort of

    • ...implement digital identities for citizens...

      Not sure how I feel about that one.

      This was in the context of benefits eligibility, but it's also exactly the kind of system Texas, Florida, others should have implemented as part of an age validation requirements for websites they don't like. Instead of telling site operators to figure it out and normalizing submitting photos of your state ID to sketchy websites, or driving traffic to sketchier international or underground sites that DGAF.

      The use of “Yes/No” validation services, also referred to as attribute validation services, can enable more privacy-preserving means to reduce identity fraud. These services allow programs to confirm, via a privacy-preserving “yes” or “no” response, that applicant-provided identity information is consistent with information already contained in official records, without needing to share the contents of those official records.

      A whole lot of the internet should have anonymous age verification IMO. We check ID in real life. If a

      • This was in the context of benefits eligibility, but it's also exactly the kind of system Texas, Florida, others should have implemented as part of an age validation requirements for websites they don't like. Instead of telling site operators to figure it out and normalizing submitting photos of your state ID to sketchy websites, or driving traffic to sketchier international or underground sites that DGAF.

        I'm just gonna keep this short and sweet: DO NOT WANT.

        A whole lot of the internet should have anonymous age verification IMO. We check ID in real life.

        We check ID in real life because there's no other gateways you have to pass through before existing in the real world. Some other entity has to provide you with internet access or you're not getting online. That's where the age check should be. Hell, with the exception of open WiFi access points, that's generally already the case with most service providers that you have to sign up for. Why do I need to verify my age multiple times across the web, w

        • Why do I need to verify my age multiple times across the web, when my service provider already knows I'm an adult?

          Because they don't know that you're an adult. All they know is that somebody who could prove they were an adult signed up for their service; they don't know that you're that person.
          • Because they don't know that you're an adult. All they know is that somebody who could prove they were an adult signed up for their service; they don't know that you're that person.

            And that's no different than how it works if you buy anything else that's age-restricted and then bring it home. As the purchasing adult, you're now responsible if someone underage is getting access to something they shouldn't. It's so bizarre that we've let parents shirk their responsibility and now expect the lawmakers to force every damn adult site on the entire web to clean up the mess, but that bottle of rum on my kitchen counter couldn't care less if someone under 21 tries to drink it.

  • While the Executive Order has been around for a long time, it's only been since 2001 and the beginning of the Imperial Presidency that it was used to any great extent, and now its abuse is getting thoroughly out of hand. Mind, there isn't a chance in Hell that the congresscritters can stop their backstabbing and petty bickering long enough to create legislation on any of these issues, but that doesn't mean that the Executive can just arbitrarily dictate to the rest of us what our future is going to look li

    • by Rinnon ( 1474161 )

      but that doesn't mean that the Executive can just arbitrarily dictate to the rest of us what our future is going to look like.

      Or can they?

    • by organgtool ( 966989 ) on Thursday January 16, 2025 @12:39PM (#65093947)
      Exactly what is it about Executive Orders that bothers you? They're basically just directives that provide consistency within the executive branch by detailing the expectations of the president to all executive agencies. All of those agencies are still bound to the Constitution and all laws created by the legislative branch, which can't be overridden by EOs. So what harm are we experiencing by having the president use a tool that helps perform his or her sworn duties?
      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        by gtall ( 79522 )

        Excuse me? Have you ever listened to el Bunko? He won't give a rat's ass about whether his order violates the Constitution and neither will his sycophantic potted plants he's installing in the agencies. Most are only there because they have money and have found that by buttering el Bunko's ass, they can use government to boost their old companies and/or industries.

        They'll simply assume the position and follow the EO until some outside organization sues. And then they'll drag it out in court all the while fo

        • by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Thursday January 16, 2025 @01:07PM (#65094025)

          The US (collectively) failed to learn from the first Trump administration. It doubled down.

          As an outsider, my top preference would be a recovery, but if the choices are the US falling apart or turning into a coordinated fascist oligarchy with the might of the US military behind it? I'm hoping for dissolution. There are a lot of individual states the rest of the world could get along with, but a single USA presents more challenges every day.

        • But that is true of the last 50 Presidents. Every single one of them.

        • Are you sure you aren't talking about FDR? He ran roughshod over the Constitution, signed more executive orders than any other President, and had so many problems with the Supreme Court smacking him down that he tried to destroy it.
    • by Zak3056 ( 69287 ) on Thursday January 16, 2025 @12:53PM (#65093979) Journal

      While the Executive Order has been around for a long time, it's only been since 2001 and the beginning of the Imperial Presidency that it was used to any great extent

      Interesting choice of start date there. Of course, "Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kind of cool." is a quote from the Clinton [nytimes.com] administration. As far as "great extent" goes, FDR issued more executive orders per year of his very long presidency than Dubya did in his entire eight year tenure. The actual data [statista.com] about presidential executive orders is pretty interesting, and this appears to be a phenomenon that began in the late 19th century.

      Oddly enough, Joe Biden has been one of if not the most restrained presidents in the past 150 years with regard to the number of executive orders he's issued--he's about tied with Dubya's dad (he has a few days left to catch up and only needs about half a dozen more), the two of them issuing the fewest since Chester A. Arthur was president.

      None of this, of course, relates to the content of those orders, just their number. But laying this at Dubya's feet doesn't really seem to match up with history very well. I'd also not hesitate to note that the amount of power that has been delegated to the executive by congress is absurd, and those sons of bitches should be doing their job rather than allowing the president and the bureaucracy to remain so unchecked and unbalanced.

      • by cusco ( 717999 )

        While I'm sure you're right about the number of them Shrub's lunatics really got down in the weeds as far as directing the various parts of the Executive Branch to implement their programs, to the point where some of them had to be withdrawn because they were blatantly directing staffers to violate the law.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by narcc ( 412956 )

        Oh, they don't care about facts. All that matters is that they feel like Biden's use of executive orders is the worst abuse of power in the history of the presidency. This is the same way they "know" that crime is out-of-control, even though it has fallen by half since it peaked in 1993, falling in all categories with robbery almost reaching a historic low.

        It's, like, all about the vibes, man. Tune in to those alternative facts and get a groovy outrage buzz going.

    • Posting this for reference. https://www.federalregister.go... [federalregister.gov]

    • I think you're quite a bit off on a lot of this, but I understand why. I, also, grew up in the Bush 2 era with all the post 9/11 insanity, but Bush didn't create the concept of the executive order and certainly wasn't the first president to enact policy with them. He was just the first one we were *really* paying attention to.
      • by cusco ( 717999 )

        I mostly remember it because he was the first (in my memory anyway) to have to withdraw an EO because he was telling workers to blatantly break laws.

      • Or was he just the first one you were old enough to know about?
    • There also isn't a chance in Hell that any of Biden's 4500 executive orders will survive past Tuesday the 21st.

    • Well, no. Most of the executive orders were signed by FDR and their use has decreased since his administration. https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]

      It's not just because his was the longest administration, he signed more every year than any other President. FDR did abuse the power. Authoritarianism was very popular around the world at the time, and he didn't want to be left out.

      EOs often lead to legislation. That's how the CIA came into being. They can also be overturned by Congress, later Presidents

  • This is government. Incompetence is a feature not a bug. You can provide the most secure software in the world to government, and they will instantly find a way to break it. Even mythically foolproof software will find a greater fool in government. The password to the secure software will be on a sticky note in the background of every social media post by every bureaucrat. Unstoppable force meets immovable object.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    ...AI's security benefits....

    Umm...

    • by Entrope ( 68843 )

      Haven't you heard? The "S" in "AI" stands for security! And the second "S" is for safety.

  • Check out section 2 part E, where there is a directive for 3 letter agencies to submit patches to FOSS projects....

    Then cross reference with ALL OF SECTION 6, where they want to use AI to generate said patches!

    The degree of profanity on Linux Kernel Mailing list will be legendary if this actually sticks!

    • by SeaFox ( 739806 )

      They can submit patches... nothing forcing projects to actually accept them.

      • I didnt say they had to.

        More, the inevitable when Linus 'says no' and 'excludes AI generated patches', with resulting fireworks, as NSA and pals keep submitting them, as the EO directs.

    • Check out section 2 part E, where there is a directive for 3 letter agencies to submit patches to FOSS projects....

      Then cross reference with ALL OF SECTION 6, where they want to use AI to generate said patches!

      The degree of profanity on Linux Kernel Mailing list will be legendary if this actually sticks!

      Good lord. The one thing we don't need is for FOSS projects to get crapflooded with AI generated patches for this, that, the other, and that thing that may have needed a patch six years ago but the AI just stumbled over in the bug reports today. There won't be enough hours in the human reviewers lives to stem the flow of bullshit. It'll pretty much grind any FOSS project to a halt that has to filter out this nonsense. Maybe that's the point? Kill FOSS projects by crapflooding them with patches until they ca

  • by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Thursday January 16, 2025 @12:49PM (#65093969) Homepage

    Four days before he leaves office, US president Joe Biden has issued a sweeping cybersecurity directive

    Gotta get that pork secured, before the next administration comes in. Wonder who paid him off, at the last possible minute?

  • The government says it needs more government to govern "because hackers". Yeah, I'm shocked **yawn**Does it stop the terrorists and protect the children, too? Pfft. Hopefully, this EO gets taken out and shot along with the rest of the tripe from Biden.
  • by hyades1 ( 1149581 ) <hyades1@hotmail.com> on Thursday January 16, 2025 @02:12PM (#65094191)

    They had four years to get this done. So Biden signs an executive order during his last few days in office that the incoming Trump regime will dismantle or disregard, and we're supposed to give the Wall Street Democratic Party credit for acting to protect voters from rapacious special interests.

    Screw 'em. They deserved to lose.

    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      by Powercntrl ( 458442 )

      They deserved to lose.

      They deserved to lose to somebody better, not somebody worse. It's like pouring gasoline on your house fire because you're pissed off that the fire department is taking too long to arrive. There's a reason we have the expression "cutting off your nose to spite your face."

      • Well, the voters decided Trump was better, so yours would seem to be the minority position.
        • Well, the voters decided Trump was better, so yours would seem to be the minority position.

          Funny thing about popularity contests is that they don't always end up with the best choice by an objective standard as the winner. Take McDonald's for example - hugely popular, but their food is poor quality and quite unhealthy.

          Trump didn't have to be "better" to win, the electorate simply had to be frustrated enough with the Democrats that Trump became the de facto way of saying "no" to their continued leadership. It's one of the most significant flaws of our two party system: a vote for the opposing pa

  • You have got to be sh~H~H~Hing me :o

Power corrupts. And atomic power corrupts atomically.

Working...