PPD-21

Change is needed, and Wilson summarizes the problems of government agencies and offers alternative market solutions and propositions.

Evaluating the pros and cons of government operated security versus returning to privately owned security

The Private Sector is an important entity within the Homeland Security Enterprise. The term “enterprise” includes all Department Homeland Security’s (DHS) partners and the 22 different federal agencies to work together with the same common goal (Department of Homeland Security, 2015). One of DHS’s partners is the Private Sector. The Private Sector is considered a single, overarching entity that is comingled within the society (APUS Week 1 Lesson). In simple terms, the private sector is entities that are not part of the public entity or the government and operates to make profit. Unlike the public sector (federal, state, or local government agencies), who operate for the citizens and does not operate for profit. As a single and overarching, entity, the private sector’s roles and responsibilities include: planning, critical infrastructure, partnerships, science and technology, and resilience (APUS Week 1 Lesson).

This would allow the government to foot the cost of research and development and slightly standardize the industry. An option should be established to allow the private sector to add input and aid in creating concepts that would aid in cyber security measures within their industry. One issue of concern would be how slow the government can be sometimes to create or implement features such as cyber security measures or equipment. Cyber security laws have not yet caught up to the technology which available to most of the public. Including the private sector to have an option to assist in creating cyber security programs and measures may be beneficial with expediting the process of implementing security

Enrich partnership among Protective Security Advisors, all levels of government, and the private sector to protect critical infrastructure

On a macro level, public administration and business management are similar in their overall functions. “At the broadest level, some organizational theorists contend that administration is administration whatever its setting, and that the problems of organizing people, leading them and supplying them with resources to do their jobs are always the same (Kettl, 2012, p. 38).” In his paper, “Public and Private Management: Are They Fundamentally Alike in All Unimportant Respects?,” Graham T. Allison explains that in comparing public and administration and business management, “it is possible to identify a set of general management functions (Allison, 2012, p. 4).” Regardless of their end goal, each administration must form strategies by setting goals, priorities and creating procedures. Public and private organizations must manage internal components by organizing staff, defining job responsibilities, hiring and managing personnel and creating budgets. Furthermore, they must manage external constituencies such as other agencies, the press and public (Allison, 2012, p. 5). His observations stem from Wallace Sayre’s famous words, “public and private management are fundamentally alike in all unimportant respects (DiIlulio, 1993).”

Americans depend on government bureaucracies to accomplish most of what we expect from government, and we are oftentimes critical of a bureaucracy’s handling of its responsibilities. Bureaucracy is essential for carrying out the tasks of government. As government bureaucracies grew in the twentieth century, new management techniques sought to promote greater efficiency. The reorganization of the government to create the Department of Homeland Security and the Bush administration’s simultaneous push to contract out jobs to private employers raises the question as to whether the government or the private sector can best manage our national security. Ironically, the criticism of the bureaucracy may be a product

Impacts to cybercrime today is forcing government and security agencies to place focus on cybersecurity within government, private, and public sectors. In 2015, the administration intends to pass legislation to strengthen cybersecurity across the U.S. government and private industry through information sharing methods. Contradictory controversy exists whether the government may dictate how the private industry should carry out their cybersecurity, if so, is it effective? Over the last several years, the government has collaborated with private sectors to develop programs, guidelines, publications, and information sharing legislation; but unresolved public concern continues to grow over information transparency and its impact to civil

The Presidential Policy Directive (PPD) on Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience advances a national unity of effort to strengthen and maintain secure, functioning, and resilient critical infrastructure (The White House Office of the Press Secretary, February 2013). It is imperative for every nation to develop a critical infrastructure protection plan that will provide the essential services to its society. To archive this, a government must be proactive and coordinate its efforts that will reinforce and maintain secure, functioning, and

According to the reading, the private sector’s specific role in achieving the overall objectives of PPD 21 & EO 13636 is through information sharing and active partnership with all entities as part of the national effort. Owners and operators of critical infrastructures must manage and determine effective strategies within their own constructs of operations and assets to make them more secure and resilient. The whole purpose of the PPD 21 and EO 13636 for private sector’s role is creating cross-sector partnerships to improving and filling the gaps for our Nation’s critical infrastructure (physical and cyber) through information sharing and collaboratively develop and implement risk-based standards (Obama, 2013).

The growing number of cyber security threats has brought about a proliferation of businesses offering various forms of network protection solutions. This may

The Federal Government needs to create information systems which are more effective shielded systems to protect their assets and resources at home. The foundation of any mandated cybersecurity strategies that secure our nation national security must incorporate worldwide or state local threats whether targeted toward the federal government or the private sector forces. The OPM breach highlighted the insufficient and inconsistence security approaches the federal government has already used in modernizing the existing cybersecurity policies. There is a requirement for the United States government to institute polices that would incorporate and implement new government cybersecurity structures and centralized the protection of their assets to avert future breaches (Source). Examining the inadequacies in the current national cybersecurity policies and regulations is disappointing as OPM choice to implement these mechanisms and the current authoritative propositions to cybersecurity must change immediately. It was reported that OPM only spent $2 million in 2015 to avert pernicious digital assaults, while the Department of Agriculture spent $39 million. The Department of Commerce, Department of Education, and Department of Labor likewise invested more money in cybersecurity resources than the Office of Personnel Management. The Small Business Administration devoted a similar amount into cybersecurity to recognizing, examining, and alleviate any cyber breaches as OPM, however

In the previous five years, cybersecurity has turned into the most looked for after calling around the world. More than 90 percent of respondents to an overview directed by the Ponemon Institute (2011) detailed being a casualty to cyberattacks amid the most recent year, costing all things considered more than $2 million for each association. This number keeps on ascending as the two programmers and security devices progress. As indicated by PwC, roughly 33% of all U.S. organizations are as of now utilizing digital protection (Lindros and Tittel, 2016).

For the possibility of an uptick in cyber incidents, the federal government has developed a number of tools to help

Every state in the nation should have a comprehensive IT security policy due to the “growing array of state and non-state actors are compromising, stealing, changing, or destroying information and could cause critical disruptions to U.S. systems” ("Cyberspace policy RevIew", 2016). Because of “ the dual challenge of maintaining an environment that promotes efficiency, innovation, economic prosperity, and free trade while also promoting safety, security, civil liberties, and privacy rights” ("Cyberspace policy RevIew", 2016). It is the responsibility of state and the federal government “ to address strategic vulnerabilities in cyberspace and ensure that the United States and the world realize the full potential of the information technology revolution” ("Cyberspace policy RevIew", 2016).