```
                                                                 
National Preparedness: Integrating New and Existing Technology	 
and Information Sharing into an Effective Homeland Security	 
Strategy (07-JUN-02, GAO-02-811T).				 
                                                                 
Federal, state, and local governments, and the private sector,	 
are taking steps to strengthen the safety and security of the	 
American people, including actions to strengthen border and port 
security, airport security, health and food security and to	 
protect critical infrastructure. There are date,		 
information-sharing, and technology challenges facing the country
in developing and implementing a national preparedness strategy. 
The nature of the terrorist threat makes it difficult to identify
and differentiate information that can provide an early 	 
indication of a terrorist threat from the mass of data available 
to those in positions of authority. Further, the nation faces	 
considerable cultural, legal, and technical barriers in 	 
effectively collecting and sharing information. Many technologies
key to addressing threats are not yet available, and many	 
existing technologies have not effectively adapted for the	 
threats the country now faces. The real challenge, however, is	 
not just to find the right solutions to each of these problems	 
but to weave solutions together in an integrated and intelligent 
fashion.							 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-02-811T					        
    ACCNO:   A03535						        
  TITLE:     National Preparedness: Integrating New and Existing      
Technology and Information Sharing into an Effective Homeland	 
Security Strategy						 
     DATE:   06/07/2002 
  SUBJECT:   Counterterrorism					 
	     Emergency preparedness				 
	     Information resources management			 
	     Information technology				 
	     Intergovernmental relations			 
	     National defense operations			 
	     Strategic planning 				 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-02-811T
     
NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS

Integrating New and Existing Technology and Information Sharing into an
Effective Homeland Security Strategy Statement of Randall A. Yim

Managing Director, National Preparedness

United States General Accounting Office

GAO Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Technology and Procurement

Policy, Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery Expected at 10: 00 a. m. EDT Friday June 7, 2002

GAO- 02- 811T

1 Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I appreciate the opportunity to participate in today?s hearing on homeland
security. In the wake of the terrorism attacks of September 11, the Office
of Homeland Security is preparing a strategy to address these threats to our
nation. In addition, federal, state, and local governments, and the private
sector, are taking steps to strengthen the safety and security of the
American people, including actions to strengthen border and port security,
airport security, and health and food security and to protect critical
infrastructure. You asked me to discuss what challenges exist in
facilitating these security initiatives-- particularly in terms of
technology and information sharing- and how addressing these challenges fits
in with developing and implementing a national preparedness strategy.

In brief, there are specific data, information- sharing, and technology
challenges facing the country in developing and implementing a national
preparedness strategy.

The nature of the terrorist threat makes it difficult to identify and
differentiate information that can provide an early indication of a
terrorist threat from the mass of data available to those in positions of
authority responsible for homeland security.

We face considerable barriers- cultural, legal, and technical-- in
effectively collecting and sharing information.

Many technologies key to addressing threats are not yet available, and many
existing technologies have not been effectively adapted for the threats the
country now faces.

The real challenge, however, is not just to find the right solutions to each
of these problems but to weave solutions together in an integrated and
intelligent fashion so that they are collectively more than the sum of their
parts. At the national level, this will require developing a blueprint, or
architectural construct, that defines both the homeland security mission and
the information, technologies, and approaches necessary to perform the
mission in a way that is divorced from organizational parochialism and
cultural differences. Local, state, and federal agencies responsible for
homeland

2 security will need to carry out their respective roles under this
construct with a great

deal of assistance from the private sector. Fortunately, there are starting
points for addressing each challenge and actions are being taken to
strengthen security in a broad range of areas. But there will still be a
need for mechanisms to make sure that things happen as they should.

In preparing for this testimony, we relied on our prior reports and
testimonies on national preparedness, critical infrastructure protection,
enterprise architectures, intellectual property, and information technology.
We reviewed and analyzed studies on homeland security and a variety of
proposals for developing a comprehensive strategy. We also analyzed
government and industry reports on the use of remote sensing technologies,
media reports of information- sharing difficulties, governmentwide guidance
on the development of architectures, as well as statements from the Office
of Homeland Security on the actions taken to address homeland- specific
challenges. In addition, we recently discussed with industry officials the
specific barriers to sharing information on vulnerabilities and attacks.

THE THREAT THAT THE COUNTRY IS FACING AND HOW IT NEEDS TO BE POSITIONED TO
RESPOND

Our country cannot be 100- percent secure from terrorist attack,
particularly when these threats are asymmetric to our strengths, and when
terrorists intend to sustain their efforts for as long as need be but view
success in terms of single, isolated events causing loss of life or
disruption of normal daily routines. What makes it particularly difficult to
gauge and respond to this kind of threat?

Terrorist groups are typically loosely structured, fluid and flexible units,
operating in the background seeking targets of opportunity-- what futurist
Edith Weiner terms

?hiborgs? or hybrid organizations. By contrast, our government is highly
structured and less able to change rapidly.

Terrorists groups take advantage of targets becoming complacent, or simply
being

3 unable to recognize threats that ?blend? into the background of normal
life.

Countering this complacency and sustaining a high alert status on our part
is very difficult.

The primary job of the terrorist is to find the soft spots, or
vulnerabilities, such as lax airport security, unprotected borders, or weak
controls over critical computer assets- and to attack these targets in
asymmetric ways. Our job- to limit the soft spots-- is much more difficult
and costly. As the aftermath of the September 11 attacks has shown,
providing airports with adequate security alone is a massive challenge-
requiring the hiring of thousands of security personnel, acquiring advanced
security technology, placing undercover law enforcement officials on
flights, developing new passenger boarding procedures, training pilots and
flight crews on hijacking scenarios, limiting access points, deploying
national guardsmen, and instituting second screening procedures. While
significant steps have been taken to improve passenger security, concerns
remain, such as the safety of charter airlines.

Moreover, our government agencies are still required to perform missions or
provide essential public services that extend their responsibilities well
beyond countering terrorists-- with finite fiscal and human capital
resources.

It is extremely difficult to defend against a suicide bomber or other
asymmetric threats. Yet we are not helpless. Asymmetry can also be made to
work to our advantage particularly if we recognize that government
institutions are highly structured and less fluid, and deliberately take
advantage of innovative and readily adaptable tools that enable us to better
counter terrorists and employ our positive asymmetrical advantages against
such groups. Moreover, this country has tremendous resources at its
disposal, leading edge technologies, a superior research and development
base, and extensive expertise and experience of human capital resources.
However, there are substantial challenges to leveraging these tools,
including getting the right information at the right time and sharing it and
getting the right technologies, and developing a construct that makes sure
not only that the right information goes to the right people, but that we
can prevent, detect, and respond to attacks in a concerted, effective
manner.

4 DATA CHALLENGES

Getting the right information needed for effective and sustainable homeland
security will be a daunting challenge, considering the myriad of possible
targets, types of attack, and variables that need to be considered in any
one aspect of homeland security. Nevertheless it is important to begin
deciding what needs to be collected, how it should be collected, and what
form it should take so that we can begin to collect data that we will need
over time to detect terrorist activity before an actual attack.

The first challenge in doing this is to develop an understanding of the
homeland security mission, goals, and objectives, and the key activities and
players involved. 1 This includes learning specifically (1) who does what
for what reason; (2) how, where, and when they do it; (3) what do they use
in order to do it; and (4) in what form. It also includes developing risk
and threat analyses. Building this knowledge will be considerably difficult,
considering the number of individuals and organizations involved in national
preparedness and the asymmetrical nature of the threat, but it is essential
to identify gaps in data, technology, and approaches.

1 We plan to issue a report on the need to define the homeland security
mission within the next month.

What Needs to Be Done?

Develop an understanding of the homeland security mission and who does what,
for what reason, and how/where/when they do it. From that knowledge, decide
on the types of data to be collected and reported as well as on the level of
detail.

Collect needed information from a broad range of entities-from federal,
state, and local agencies, the private sector, and the research and
development community--not just once, but consistently over time so that
trends may be established.

Determine the right format and standards for collecting data so that
disparate agencies can aggregate and integrate data and communicate those
standards to reporting entities.

Prioritize data, boil it down to the pieces that can be used to build
baselines of normal activity and mechanisms that can effectively detect
deviations or anomalies that would indicate vulnerabilities or threats and
how serious they may be.

5 Other data- related challenges include the following:

Deciding what types of data need to be collected for certain activities as
well as the level of detail. This can be extremely complex for any one
aspect of national preparedness. Take transportation mobility, for example,
which is critical in the event of a chemical, biological, or nuclear attack.
Road network information, when combined with digital elevation models and
terrain analysis would help analysts identify transportation or other
infrastructure open to threats and to plan mitigating strategies. The same
information would also help to identify alternate routing to evacuate or
avoid affected areas. Census data and current weather patterns (winds,
temperature, and humidity) would allow emergency management officials to
determine which areas are most at risk and plan appropriate evacuation
routes under multiple scenarios. Finally, any large- scale evacuation will
stress emergency facilities and other transportation network elements. As
immediate postattack work done at the World Trade Center illustrates, real-
time aerial data can also assist clean- up and recovery efforts. 2

Balancing varying interests and expectations. For example, as we have
testified in the past, 3 when it comes to protecting cyberspace, the private
sector may want specific threat or vulnerability information so that
immediate actions can be taken to avert an intrusion. Law enforcement
agencies may want specific information on perpetrators and particular
aspects of the attack, as well as the intent of the attack and the
consequences of or damages due to the attack. At the same time, many
computer security professionals may want the technical details that enable a
user to compromise a computer system in order to determine how to detect
such actions.

2 See Ray A. Williamson, ?Information as Security: Remote Sensing,
Transportation Lifelines and Homeland Security,? Space Imaging, (May/ June
2002). 3 See U. S. General Accounting Office, Critical Infrastructure
Protection: Challenges to Building a Comprehensive Strategy for Information
Sharing and Coordination, GAO/ T- AIMD- 00- 268, (Washington, D. C.: July
26, 2000).

6

Deciding how much is enough. It is important to recognize that it is not
possible to build an overall, comprehensive picture of activity on a
national scale or even certain confines of activity. For example, it would
not be possible to develop a complete picture of the nation?s information
infrastructure. Networks themselves are too big, they are growing too
quickly, and they are continually being reconfigured and reengineered.

Determining the right format and standards for collecting data so that
disparate agencies can aggregate and integrate data sets. For example,
Extensible Markup Language (XML) standards could be considered as one option
to exchange information among disparate systems. 4 Further, guidelines and
procedures need to be specified to establish effective data- collection
processes, and mechanisms need to be put in place to make sure that this
happens- again, a difficult task, given the large number of government,
private, and nonprofit organizations that will be involved in data
collection. Finally, mechanisms will be needed to disseminate data, making
sure that it gets into the hands of the right people at the right time.

More importantly, to make sure the homeland strategy is sustainable, we
eventually need to boil data down to the pieces that will allow us to build
baselines of normal activity and mechanisms that will enable us to
effectively detect deviations or anomalies that would indicate
vulnerabilities or threats and how serious they may be. This is already done
on a much smaller scale for such things as self- diagnostic systems in
automobiles, aircraft, and even electric appliances that alert the owner or
manufacturer after sensing slight temperature changes or other small
deviations that could indicate a mechanical problem even before it occurs.
Moreover, it is done for protecting computer networks. 5 But

4 XML is a flexible, nonproprietary set of standards for annotating or
?tagging? information so that it can be transmitted over a network and
readily interpreted by disparate systems. For more information on its
potential use for electronic government initiatives, see U. S. General
Accounting Office, Electronic Government: Challenges to Effective Adoption
of the Extensible Markup Language, GAO- 02- 327, (Washington, D. C.: April
2002).

5 Intrusion detection systems used to protect computer networks are built
based on data on normal use of system and network activity as well as known
attack patterns. Deviations are discovered based on data from analyses of
network packets, captured from network backbones or local area network
segments, or data sources generated by the operating system or application
software.

7 doing this promises to be an extremely complicated endeavor for homeland
security.

For starters, determining what is normal and abnormal activity relative to
terrorists would be difficult because it would require developing an
extensive body of knowledge- beyond just intelligence information-- to build
a baseline for terrorist activity when the activity itself is elusive,
fluid, and difficult to predict.

Fortunately, there are good places to start data gathering and modeling.
Organizations known as Information Sharing and Analysis Centers (ISACs) are
already collecting information on critical aspects of our infrastructure;
government agencies at all levels have databases that may be adapted and
become useful for such activities as tracking potential terrorists or
detecting biological attacks; and extensive information is already being
collected through the use of satellites and remote sensing technology that
should be useful in building models to detect, analyze, and respond to
threats.

Starting Points

Information Sharing and Analysis Centers are being established to develop
information on the nation?s critical infrastructure, specifically,
information to identify vulnerabilities and prevent and respond to attacks.
These include the National Coordinating Center for Telecommunications and
the Financial Services Information Sharing and Analysis Center. In September
2001, we reported that six ISACs within five infrastructures had been
established and that at least three more were being formed.

Federal agencies, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), Customs, Health and Human
Services, already have databases containing information critical to homeland
security. State and local governments also have databases that, if adapted,
will be useful, such as those belonging to highway and transportation
departments, county health departments, and school systems.

Models and statistical techniques have already been developed by the
military to analyze threats and provide ?gaming? simulation of
multiple-threat scenarios. In addition, agencies are already collecting
information that could feed into these models, such as census and weather
data; aerial mapping of cities and farmlands; detailed images of shipping
and transportation routes; and maps detailing critical infrastructure and
their capacities, such as telecommunications and utility lines.

8 INFORMATION- SHARING CHALLENGES

Events preceding and following the attacks of September 11 spotlighted one
of our most serious vulnerabilities. We do not share information
effectively, particularly when it comes to intelligence, law enforcement,
and response activities. If we cannot do a better job of sharing
information, we will not be able to effectively identify vulnerabilities,
develop needed technology, and coordinate efforts to detect and respond to
attacks.

Federal agencies and the Congress are still looking into the specifics of
information sharing- difficulties related to the September 11 attacks, but
recent reports of information- sharing failures within the FBI and CIA
highlight some of the primary barriers we face: stovepiped organizational
structures, inadequate database sharing, and simple ?turf? issues. Legal and
regulatory impediments may have made informationsharing even more difficult.

This problem is not new. Two years ago, for example, we testified that the
ILOVEYOU computer virus, which affected governments, corporations, media
outlets, and other institutions worldwide, highlighted the need for greater
information sharing and coordination to respond to attacks on our critical
infrastructure. Because informationsharing mechanisms were not able to
provide timely enough warnings against the impending attack, many entities
were caught off guard and forced to take their networks off- line for hours.
Getting the word out within some federal agencies themselves also proved
difficult. At the Department of Defense, for example, the lack of
teleconferencing capability slowed the response effort because Defense
components had to be called

What Needs to Be Done?

Establish effective information-sharing between private-sector, nonprofit,
and government organizations to facilitate research and development efforts,
data collection efforts, law enforcement efforts, and efforts to respond to
attacks.

Ensure that security measures exist to protect sensitive information.

9 individually. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration had
difficulty

communicating warnings when E- mail services disappeared. Some departments
that received warnings did not share that information with their bureaus.

As illustrated below, however, the problem of information sharing is much
more extensive than just sharing information about an impending attack- it
extends from the early stages of research and development, to collecting
data, preventing and detecting attacks, and responding to attacks. Barriers
themselves extend well beyond poor mechanisms for issuing attack warnings or
communicating calls for ?heightened alert.? For example, in recent
discussions with us, industry officials said that their chief concern in
sharing information about vulnerabilities and attacks is disclosure of
proprietary data. Our past reviews have also highlighted concerns about
roles and responsibilities, antitrust violations, and national security as
barriers to sharing information.

In short, there are formidable challenges that need to be overcome to build
a more comprehensive and effective information- sharing relationships. 6
Trust needs to be established among a broad range of stakeholders, important
questions on the mechanics of information sharing and coordination need to
be resolved, and roles and responsibilities need to be clarified among all
levels of government.

Where Information Sharing Can Potentially Break Down Why

Government efforts to sponsor research and development efforts to develop
new homeland security technologies

Intellectual property concerns may affect the willingness to contract with
the government, including poor definitions of what technical data are needed
by the government and unwillingness on the part of government officials to
exercise the flexibilities available to them concerning intellectual
property rights.

Concerns that inadvertent release of confidential business material, such as
attempted or successful attacks, gaps in security, or trade secrets or
proprietary information, could damage reputations, lower consumer
confidence, hurt competitiveness, and decrease market shares of firms.

6 For more information about barriers to information sharing, see GAO/ T-
AIMD- 00- 268 and U. S. General Accounting Office, Intellectual Property:
Industry and Agency Concerns Over Intellectual Property Rights, GAO- 02-
723T, (Washington, D. C.: May 10, 2002).

10

Where Information Sharing Can Potentially Break Down Why

Government efforts to facilitate data sharing on critical infrastructures

Concerns about potential antitrust violations may keep companies from
sharing information with other industry partners.

Concerns that sharing information with the government could subject data to
Freedom of Information Act disclosures or expose companies to potential
liability may also prevent companies from sharing data with government
agencies.

Private sector efforts to get data from the government on potential
vulnerabilities and threats

National security concerns may prevent agencies from sharing data with the
private sector.

The process of declassifying and sanitizing data takes time- possibly too
long to be of use to private-sector time-critical operations.

Security clearances may not be available for the ?right people? who need to
know.

Coordinating law enforcement and intelligence activities Law enforcement and
intelligence agencies operate in ?distinct

universes? separated by jurisdictional, organizational, and cultural
boundaries. At the same time, however, roles and responsibilities at
different levels of government are not always clear and distinct.

Information may be considered too sensitive to release to law enforcement
colleagues because it could compromise source and collection techniques.

Certain laws and regulations as well as privacy concerns may prevent
information sharing between federal agencies, state, and local law
enforcement agencies.

Insufficient direction about what specific steps should be taken when
security alert status is increased.

Lack of access to databases and problems with interconnectivity may impede
information sharing between agencies.

Issuing attack warnings and responding to attacks Information-sharing
mechanisms and procedures for warning

against attacks, especially between different levels of government, may be
inadequate.

Roles and responsibilities between emergency, rescue, relief, and recovery
organizations may not always be clear, especially at different levels of
government.

Because information sharing was a critical problem in other crises facing
the government, there are some very good models to learn from and build on.
The ISACs mentioned earlier are a good example of government and private-
sector relationships for

11 information sharing. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
also uses

several information- sharing computer systems to help accomplish its mission
to monitor health, detect and investigate health problems, and conduct
research to enhance the prevention of disease. 7 In addition, actions have
already been taken by the Congress and the administration to strengthen
information sharing. The USA Patriot Act, for example, enhances or promotes
information sharing between federal agencies, and numerous terrorism task
forces have been established to coordinate the investigations and improve
communications between federal and local law enforcement agencies. Also,
very recently, leading financial services firms in New York formed a private
database company that will compile information about criminals, terrorists,
and other suspicious people for use in screening new customers and weeding
out those who may pose a risk. The company will specifically focus on
helping financial companies comply with antimoney- laundering regulations,
including requirements in legislative approved after the September 11
attacks. Additional private- sector solutions also need to be considered,
such as current research efforts to link airline reservation systems.

7 We reported in September 2001 that the usefulness of several of these
systems is impaired both by CDC?s untimely release of data and by gaps in
the data collected.

Starting Points

The Agora is a Seattle-based regional network of over 600 professionals
representing various fields, including information systems security; law
enforcement; local, state, and federal governments; engineering; information
technology; academics; and other specialties. Members work to establish
confidential ways for organizations to share sensitive information about
common problems and best practices for dealing with security threats. They
develop and share knowledge about how to protect electronic infrastructures,
and they prompt more research specific to electronic information systems
security.

Carnegie Mellon University?s CERT Coordination Center (CERT/CC) is charged
with establishing a capability to quickly and effectively coordinate
communication between experts in order to limit damage, respond to
incidents, and build awareness of security issues across the Internet
community. In this role, CERT/CC receives Internet security-related
information from system and network administrators, technology managers, and
policymakers and provides them with this information along with guidance and
coordination to major security events.

12 TECHNOLOGY CHALLENGES

This is one area where we certainly have an edge over terrorists. Newly
developed unmanned aerial vehicles are providing intelligence vital to
military efforts in Afghanistan. Satellite networks and remote sensing
technologies are facilitating assessments of threats overseas as well as
military operations and guidance systems for weapons systems. However,
though we have vast technological resources available on the homefront,
there are substantial challenges confronting us.

Certain technologies important to homeland security have not been developed.
These include bioweapons- and low- level- radioactive- weapons- detection
systems and disease surveillance systems.

Some technologies already in existence have not been effectively adapted to
homeland security. Space- based satellites and sensors, for example, are
being used to guide weapon systems, map cities, and study the weather and
environment. But they also may be adapted to the homeland security mission.
Moreover, some experts believe that making this transition may require
modifications to current technology, such as the addition of video features
so that we can observe ground activity as it is changing. 8

8 See Joseph A. Engelbrecht Jr., ?Global Security Will Drive Real- Time
Surveillance,? Space Imaging, (May/ June 2002).

What Needs to Be Done?

Research and develop new technologies integral to the fight against
terrorism, such as bioweapon- or low-level-radioactive-weapons-detection
systems and biometric devices.

Refine emerging technologies so that they are more user friendly and less
cost prohibitive.

Adapt existing technologies to the homeland security mission.

Connect and make interoperable databases integral to information sharing,
such as those belonging to the FBI and INS.

13

There is a lack of connectivity and interoperability between databases and
technologies important to the homeland security effort. Databases belonging
to federal law enforcement agencies and INS, for example, are not connected,
and databases between state, local, and federal governments are not always
connected. In fact, we have reported for years on federal information
systems that are duplicative and not well integrated. 9 A related problem is
that there are not common standards for data exchange and application
programming interfaces for technologies that provide physical security. As a
result, much of the equipment needed to protect buildings is not
interoperable. We recently testified, for example that deploying an access
control system that uses a smart card containing a fingerprint biometric
would require at least three pieces of equipment: the card reader device,
the fingerprint scan device, and the hardware device used to house and
operate the biometric software. 10 If these devices are made by different
manufacturers, they cannot function as an integrated environment without
costly additional software to connect the disparate components.

Some existing technologies important to homeland security are not user-
friendly. We recently testified that some biometric technologies are
inconvenient to use. 11 Retina scanning, for example, feels physically
intrusive to some users because it requires close proximity with the retinal
reading device. Moreover, fingerprinting feels socially intrusive to some
users because of its association with the processing of criminals. There is
also an assortment of health concerns among a segment of the population
regarding certain security technologies. For instance, there is evidence
that pacemakers and hearing aids can be adversely affected by some detection
technologies.

9 See U. S. General Accounting Office, Information Technology: Enterprise
Architecture Use across the Federal Government Can Be Improved, GAO- 02- 6,
(Washington, D. C.: February 2002). 10 See U. S. General Accounting Office.
National Preparedness: Technologies to Secure Federal Buildings,

GAO- 02- 687T, (Washington, D. C.: April 25, 2002). 11 See GAO- 02- 687T.

14

The capabilities of security technologies can be overestimated, potentially
luring security officials into a false sense of security and relaxed
vigilance. During our recent review of federal building security
technologies, we found instances in which the performance of biometric
technologies was overestimated. 12

Because of our nation?s substantial investment in technology and research
and development, there are numerous good starting points for developing and
harnessing technology needed for the homeland security mission. Significant
advances, for example, have already been made in technologies needed to
protect buildings, airports, and other facilities. We also have a good
technological foundation, including spacebased satellites, imagery, and
remote sensing systems, to begin developing systems for effectively
monitoring and gauging terrorist activities.

Additionally, the administration is promoting a host of new initiatives to
acquire the technologies needed for homeland security. For example, projects
already under way include the following:

Taking stock of what technologies are already available and what gaps exist.

Assessing what changes are needed to federal databases to facilitate
information sharing.

Efforts to develop protocols to permit the access of databases and
information owned by federal agencies as well as state and local
authorities.

Developing an optimized entry- exit system for border security.

Assessing biometric technology options. 12 See GAO- 02- 687T.

15

Starting Points

Continue to Develop and Refine Emerging Technology

Some of the emerging biometric devices, such as iris scans and facial
recognition systems, theoretically represent a very effective security
approach because biometric characteristics are distinct to each individual
and, unlike identification cards and pin numbers or passwords, they cannot
be easily lost, stolen, or guessed. Until recently, in addition to being
very expensive, the performance of most biometric technologies had
unreliable accuracy. However, prices have significantly decreased and, after
years of research, the technology has recently been improved considerably.

Iris scan technology is based on the unique visible characteristics of the
eye?s iris, the colored ring that surrounds the pupil. A high-resolution
digital image of the iris is taken to collect data. The system then defines
the boundaries of the iris, establishes a coordinate system over the iris,
and defines the zones for analysis within the coordinate system. The visible
characteristics within the zone are then converted into a 512-byte template.

Adapt potentially useful existing technology

Combining geospatial digital information tools, including remote sensing and
satellite imagery technology, can assist efforts to model threat prevention
and response scenarios and build baselines of normal activities and detect
deviations from the norm. The same information can also be used to respond
to a successful attack and assist in crime scene investigation. This
technology is already being used to plan and execute military operations and
analyze threats overseas, as well as to map cities, study the environment
and weather, monitor transportation and shipping routes, monitor compliance
with laws, regulations and treaties, and model differing scenarios to assist
in planning and prevention. Satellite photo with geospatial digitized
overlay.

16

Make Good Use of Low Tech Alternatives

New ionization radiation technologies that the United States Postal Service
(USPS) is implementing may be a promising way to sanitize mail contaminated
by anthrax, but there are proven low-tech solutions that should still be
considered, such as manual mail-handling procedures to presort nonanonymous
mail to reduce the volume that would require higher tech irradiation
techniques.

New high-tech explosive detection systems can be used to detect bulk or
trace explosives concealed in, on, or under vehicles, containers, packages,
and persons. However, dogs are also an effective and time-proven tool for
detecting concealed explosives. The dogs currently used by Defense, for
example, can detect nine different types of explosive materials. And since
dogs have the advantage of being mobile and able to follow a scent to its
source, they have the significant advantage over mechanical explosive
detection systems in any application that involves a search.

MECHANISMS NEEDED TO EFFECTIVELY RESPOND TO CHALLENGES

What Needs to Be Done?

Apply risk management principles to identify assets that need to be
protected to maintain continuity of operations, as well as threats,
vulnerabilities, risks, priorities, and countermeasures.

Use this understanding to develop a blueprint, or architectural construct,
that defines the information, technologies, and approaches necessary to
perform the homeland mission.

Assign responsibilities among the stakeholders so that everyone is not doing
the same thing, but instead all are doing something slightly different that
together forms a more effective shield.

Establish analytical and warning capabilities.

Create performance goals and metrics, and feedback and accountability
mechanisms, so that efficacy of investments and efforts may be measured and
programs continually improved.

Security dogs may be more cost effective and easier to deploy than new high
tech explosive detection systems

17 The overriding challenge for homeland security, of course, is how to
prevent, detect, and

respond to attacks. Technology and information are critical enablers, but
they are not the sole answer. Significant issues involving people and
approaches also need to be dealt with. For example, people- the majority of
whom will never witness a terrorist event-- will be required to be able to
sense relevant minute changes from normal activity that could alert them to
the possibility of a threat. They will also be required to work together to
implement policies, processes, and procedures that serve as countermeasures
to identified risks. To do so effectively, they will need information about
what additional concrete things they must do when new threat information
becomes available. In addition, because there are thousands of individuals
and organizations involved in detecting, preventing, and responding to
attacks and numerous projects being initiated, measures need to be taken to
prevent redundancy and inefficiency in homeland security efforts.

To be truly effective, however, the homeland security strategy needs to go
beyond promoting redundancy and efficiency to finding innovative approaches
to homeland security activities- ones that fully optimize skills,
capabilities, and available resources. The asymmetrical threat we face
demands that we act in accordance with the Marines? operation motto:
?Improvise, Adapt, Overcome.? In fact, expeditionary forces within the
military provide a good example of how we can find new approaches by
capitalizing on technology, skills and capabilities, and flexibility. These
are forces that are designed, trained, and organized in a fashion very
different from that of conventional forces, which previously relied on
highly structured and standardized approaches to war- fighting and require
considerable infrastructure in their deployments. In the Navy and the Marine
Corps, for instance, expeditionary forces have the ability to go rapidly and
easily to places where there is no infrastructure to operate on their
arrival because they carry their infrastructure in the holds of ships and on
their back. The forces are trained to be self- reliant, self- sustaining,
highly adaptable, and adept in the most austere environments. Because they
are uniquely positioned and organized to accomplish a wide range of
missions, including long- range strike operations and early forcible entry
to

18 facilitate or enable the arrival of follow- on forces, they have been
used in a wide range of

missions for decades. Starting Points There are some very good starting
points for addressing all of these challenges as well as the need to
integrate solutions to information- sharing and technology problems. These
include applying risk management principles to identifying security
priorities and implementing appropriate solutions; developing an
architecture for homeland security; developing analytical and warning
capabilities; and establishing goals and performance measures and
accountability mechanisms.

Risk Management Principles Risk management principles should be applied to
analyze and identify assets that need to be protected to maintain the
continuity of critical operations, as well as threats, vulnerabilities,
risks, priorities, and countermeasures. It may seem ideal to employ extreme
security measures that cover every risk imaginable. But the reality is that
this cannot be done, either because doing so could disrupt operations and
adversely affect the safety of citizens or the economics of our businesses,
or merely be impractical from a resources standpoint. Our previous reports
on homeland security and information systems security, have shown that risk
management principles can provide a sound foundation in identifying security
priorities and implementing appropriate solutions. 13 These principles,
which have been followed by members of the intelligence and defense
community for many years, can be reduced to five basic steps that help to
determine responses to five essential questions:

13 See U. S. General Accounting Office, Homeland Security: A Risk Management
Approach Can Guide Preparedness Efforts, GAO- 02- 208T (Oct. 31, 2001) and
Information Security Management: Learning From Leading Organizations, GAO/
AIMD- 98- 68 (May 1998).

19 The first step in risk management is to identify assets that must be
protected to maintain

continuity of critical operations and the impact of their potential loss.
The second step is to identify and characterize the threat to these assets.
Is the threat, for example, that unauthorized individuals can gain access to
the building to commit some crime, or more menacing, that a terrorist will
introduce a chemical/ biological agent or even a nuclear device into the
building. Step three involves identifying and characterizing vulnerabilities
that would allow identified threats to be realized. In other words, what
weaknesses can allow a security breach? In the fourth step, risk must be
assessed and priorities determined for protecting assets. Risk assessment
examines the potential for the loss or damage to an asset. Risk levels are
established by assessing the impact of the loss or damage, threats to the
asset, and vulnerabilities. The final step is to identify countermeasures to
reduce or eliminate risks. In doing so, the advantages and benefits of these
countermeasures must also be weighed against their disadvantages and costs.

In prior reports, we have recommended that the federal government conduct
multidisciplinary and analytically sound threat and risk assessments to
define and prioritize requirements and properly focus programs and
investments in combating terrorism. 14 Without the benefits that these
assessments provide, many agencies have

14 See U. S. General Accounting Office, Combating Terrorism: Selected
Challenges and Related Recommendations, GAO- 01- 822, (Washington, D. C.:
Sept. 20, 2001); Homeland Security: Key Elements of a Risk Management
Approach, GAO- 02- 150T, (Washington, D. C.: Oct. 12, 2001); Combating
Terrorism: Threat and Risk Assessments Can Help Prioritize and Target
Program Investments, GAO/ NSIAD- 98- 74,

1. What are we protecting? Identify assets critical to continuity of
operations

5. What can we do? Identify countermeasures

4. What are our priorities? Assess risks & determine priorities

3. How are we vulnerable? Identify vulnerabilities

2. Who are our adversaries? Identify threats

1. What are we protecting? Identify assets critical to continuity of
operations

5. What can we do? Identify countermeasures

4. What are our priorities? Assess risks & determine priorities

3. How are we vulnerable? Identify vulnerabilities

2. Who are our adversaries? Identify threats

20 been relying on worst- case chemical, biological, radiological, or
nuclear scenarios to

generate countermeasures or establish their programs. By using these worst-
case scenarios, the federal government is focusing on vulnerabilities (which
are unlimited) rather than credible threats (which are limited).

Homeland Security Architecture The federal government should develop a
blueprint, or architecture, that defines both the homeland security mission
and the information, technologies, and approaches necessary to perform the
mission in a way that is divorced from organizational parochialism and
cultural differences. This would need to be based on the outcome of a risk
assessment along with a good understanding of the roles and responsibilities
of individuals involved in the homeland security mission. The Office of
Homeland Security has acknowledged that an architecture is an important next
step because it can help identify shortcomings and opportunities in current
homeland- security- related operations and systems, such as duplicative,
inconsistent, or missing information. Of course, while the federal
government can develop the construct for homeland security, it will be up to
state and local governments to carry it out, with a great deal of assistance
from the private sector.

Specifically, the architecture should describe homeland security operations
in both (1) logical terms, such as interrelated processes and activities,
information needs and flows, and work locations and users, and (2) technical
terms, such as hardware, software, data, communications, and security
attributes and performance standards. It should provide these perspectives
both for the current or ?as is? environment and for the target or ?to

be? environment as well as a transition plan for moving from the ?as is? to
the ?to be? environment. A particularly critical function of an architecture
for homeland security would be to establish protocols and standards for data
collection to ensure that data being collected are usable and
interoperable-- and to tell people what they need to collect

(Washington, D. C.: Apr. 9, 1998) and Combating Terrorism: Need for
Comprehensive Threat and Risk Assessments of Chemical and Biological Attack,
GAO/ NSIAD- 99- 163, (Washington, D. C.: Sept. 7, 1999).

21 and monitor.

Many organizations have successfully developed enterprise architectures,
though on a much smaller scale, and have found that doing so promotes better
planning and decisionmaking; prevents the building of redundant systems;
facilitates the management of extensive, complex environments; improves
communication and information sharing; focuses on the strategic use of
emerging technologies; and achieves economies of scale by providing
mechanisms for sharing services. Our experience with federal agencies has
shown that managed properly, architectures can clarify and help optimize
interdependencies and interrelationships between related enterprise
operations and the underlying technology infrastructure and applications
that support them.

Readily available frameworks could be used in developing an architecture for
homeland security. These include Defense?s C4ISR Architecture Framework, the
Department of Treasury?s Enterprise Architecture Framework, and the Federal
Enterprise Architecture Framework, published by the Federal Chief
Information Officers (CIO) Council. In addition, the CIO Council, Office of
Management and Budget, and GAO have collaborated in producing guidance on
the content, development, maintenance, and implementation of architectures.
15

Analytical and Warning Capabilities Analytical and warning capabilities
should be developed to detect precursors to terrorist attacks so that
advanced warnings can be issued and protective measures implemented. Since
the 1990s, the national security community and the Congress have identified
the need to establish analytical and warning capabilities to protect against
strategic computer attacks against the nation?s critical computer- dependent
infrastructures. Such capabilities involve (1) gathering and analyzing
information for the purpose of detecting and reporting hostile or otherwise
potentially damaging actions or intentions and (2)

15 See Chief Information Officer Council, A Practical Guide to Federal
Enterprise Architecture, Version 1.0, (Washington, D. C.: Feb. 2001).

22 implementing a process for warning policymakers and allowing them time to
determine

the magnitude of the related risks. In April 2001, we reported on the
National Infrastructure Protection Center?s progress in developing such
mechanisms for computer- based attacks and impediments, which include a lack
of a generally accepted methodology for strategic analysis of cyber threats
to infrastructures, inadequate data on infrastructure vulnerabilities, and a
lack of needed staff and expertise. 16 Similar approaches should be
developed for other homeland security priorities.

Goals and Performance Measures and Accountability Mechanisms Goals and
performance measures and accountability mechanisms should be established not
only to guide the nation?s preparedness efforts but to assess how well they
are really working. The Congress has long recognized the need to objectively
assess the results of federal programs. For the nation?s preparedness
programs, however, the outcomes of where the nation should be in terms of
domestic preparedness have yet to be defined. Given the recent and proposed
increases in preparedness funding as well as the need for real and
meaningful improvements in preparedness, establishing clear goals and
performance measures are critical to ensuring both a successful and fiscally
responsible effort. As we testified earlier this year, without measurable
objectives, policymakers would be deprived of the information they need to
make rational resource allocations, and program managers would be prevented
from measuring progress. 17 In our earlier testimony, we highlighted the
recommendation of one expert with the Office of Homeland Security that the
government should develop a new statistical index of preparedness,
incorporating a range of different variables, such as quantitative measures
for special equipment, training programs, and medicines, as well as
professional subjective assessments of the quality of local response
capabilities, infrastructure, plans, readiness, and performance in
exercises. The index could go well beyond current

16 See U. S. General Accounting Office, Critical Infrastructure Protection:
Significant Challenges in Developing National Capabilities, GAO- 01- 323,
(Washington, D. C.: Apr. 25, 2001).

17 See U. S. General Accounting Office, Combating Terrorism: Critical
Components of a National Strategy to Enhance State and Local Preparedness,
GAO- 02- 548T (Washington, D. C.: Mar. 25, 2002).

23 rudimentary milestones of program implementation to capture indicators of
how well a

particular city or region could actually respond to a serious terrorist
event. -- -- -- -- - In conclusion, developing a comprehensive and
sustainable homeland security strategy is a formidable, even unprecedented
task. Because of the nature of the threat, the scope of the things that need
to be done are seemingly endless. There are significant challenges on a
variety of fronts, particularly in making sure that the right information
gets to the right people at the right time and in making good use of
technology. Moreover, any solution must be national in nature, not just a
federal strategy, since over 80 percent of nation?s infrastructure is
privately owned, and state and local government are the front line defenders
and responders in the fight against terrorism. While there are no quick
fixes or ?silver bullet? single solutions, there are good starting points
for addressing specific areas of challenges as well as for weaving solutions
together to develop an integrated framework for preventing, detecting, and
responding to attacks.

Even with these mechanisms in place, however, there will still be a need for
strong leadership on the part of the federal government and the Congress not
just to provide the resources, expertise, and training needed carry out the
strategy, but to work through concerns and barriers, develop trust
relationships, make sure things are working as they should, and most
importantly, sustain national attention to the problem.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any
questions that you or members of the subcommittee may have.

CONTACT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT For further information, please contact Randall
A. Yim at (202) 512- 6787. Individuals making key contributions to this
testimony include Cristina Chaplain and Dave Powner.

24

Attachment Attachment

Building Tools to Detect and Assess Terrorist Threats

Getting information to the right people at the right time is critical, but
we also need an intelligent strategy to integrate the information. One way
is to build baselines of normal activity and mechanisms that will enable us
to effectively detect deviations or anomalies that would indicate threats
and how serious they may be.

First step: Use Existing Technology

Intrusion detections systems are already being used to protect critical
computer networks. These systems are built based on data on normal use of
system and network activity as well as known attack patterns. Deviations are
discovered based on data from analyses of network packets, captured from
network backbones or local area network segments, or data sources generated
by the operating system or application software.

Next step: Apply the Same Know-How to Protect Other Infrastructures

For example, security information systems can be built to assess threats to
air travel. Data could be drawn from government watch lists and airline
reservations systems. Deviations could be identified by matching names from
reservation systems to government watch lists or by detecting unusual
patterns in travel or reservations.

The Challenge Ahead

Building systems to predict and detect deviations on larger scale, for
example, to protect major cities. This will be an extremely complex and
difficult endeavor. For starters, determining what is normal and abnormal
activity relative to terrorist activity would be difficult because it would
require developing an extensive body of knowledge-beyond just intelligence
information-to build a baseline for terrorist activity when the activity
itself is elusive, fluid, and difficult to predict.

Technologies that can be used in this regard include geospatial digital
information tools, including remote sensing and satellite imagery
technology.

Iris scan technology is based on the unique characteristics of the eye?s
iris, the colored ring that surrounds the pupil.

Developing other new technologies needed to detect and protect people,
buildings, and critical infrastructures from attack. This includes

Bioweapons- and low-level-radioactive-weapons-detection systems

Disease surveillance systems

Biometric devices, such as iris scans and facial recognition systems, facial
recognition systems, and speaker verification systems.

(976301)
*** End of document. ***
```