|     |     |  About Us   |   Archives   |   Contact Us |

Sign up for Security Debrief Newsletters



Archive for the ‘Counterfeit & IPR’ Category

Mexico Continues Border War

Thursday, August 20th, 2009

In what has been a lightly reported story this past week – but one for which it is impossible to overstate the importance of – President Felipe Calderon terminated 1000 customs officials (700 in some reports) from their positions as inspectors at ports of entry throughout the country.  Compared to their American counterparts, manning the ports of entry along our shared border, Mexican customs officials are not as well trained and are allegedly more vulnerable to incidents of bribery and corruption.  The terminated officers were replaced with better-trained officials and temporary military personnel in an effort to both provide better security and boost tax revenue (unlike the United States, Mexico receives a significant portion of their national tax revenue from customs duties).

This is another indication of the dedicated and serious manner in which President Calderon has continued to wage war with the drug cartels that exploit the border for their own illegitimate purposes. Also, it is another indication of the support we must give President Calderon through the Merida Initiative and our own efforts to combat southbound weapons and cash shipments.

Posted in Border Security, Civil liberties & Privacy, Congress, Politics & PR, Counterfeit & IPR, Homeland State & Local, Ideology & Public Diplomacy, Intelligence, International, Law Enforcement, Management & Administration, Narcotics, counterterrorism | Comments

Senate Committee Quashes Obama’s Immigration Rollbacks

Friday, July 10th, 2009

By Jena Baker McNeil

On Thursday, July 9, 2009, the U.S. Senate approved an amendment, as part of the DHS appropriations bill, to stop the Department of Homeland Security from rolling back Social Security No-Match–which helps ensure that employers are not employing illegal immigrants. The Obama Administration had announced plans Wednesday to rescind No-Match, and place instead greater emphasis on the use of E-Verify in workplace immigration enforcement. Sen. Sessions also won an amendment that would make E-Verify permanent and mandatory. This amended bill still has to pass the overall Senate, but it is a good step forward in terms of maintaining immigration enforcement efforts.

The Obama Administration, for its part, has attempted to portray this move as getting in the way of ‘real progress’ on immigration.  In reality, rescinding No-Match is quite the opposite of real progress.  Social Security No-Match was put in place during the Bush Administration in order to assist in workplace enforcement.  No match letters are sent when an employer hires new workers whose personal information (e.g. name and Social Security number) does not match SSA records. Based on these letters, employers are supposed to take certain steps to either resolve the matter.  Heritage Foundation experts Cully Stimson and Andrew Grossman go over this process in detail in their Backgrounder, No-Match Immigration Enforcement: Time for Action.  No-Match (like many government regulations) has undergone litigation and was enjoined by the courts. But the Obama Administration has chosen to abandon it instead of ensuring its implementation.  The Administration claims that E-Verify is going to reign in workplace enforcement.  But this seems contrary to its opposition to the Sessions E-Verify amendment that would make E-Verify permanent. And while E-Verify is certainly a vital element in this process, it can’t be the end of the road for workplace enforcement– E-Verify currently isn’t mandatory, DHS will be doing a lot less enforcement absent No-Match, not more.

Enforcing immigration in the workplace is only one part of a real solution to immigration.  The Administration’s recent actions beg the question- what is the Obama Administration’s plan for immigration? There has been more than rumblings that it plans to pressure Congress to take up a comprehensive  or ‘amnesty’ bill this fall.  But there has been a lot of skepticism, mostly centered on the notion that the American public simply will not support such a move.  And for good reason, the economy is in the tank, and the thought of a costly amnesty does not sit well on the minds, or the wallets of most Americans.

Posted in Border Security, Civil liberties & Privacy, Counterfeit & IPR, Critical Infrastructure, Immigration & Visa Policy, Law Enforcement, Management & Administration, Maritime & Seaport Security, counterterrorism | Comments

‘Pen and Pad’ Session with the Secretary

Thursday, June 25th, 2009

This afternoon I had the opportunity to participate in a ‘Pen and Pad’ Session with Sec. Napolitano.   I joined the session via teleconference, and, like her in-person appearances before the Hill, the media and speaking venues, the Secretary came through loud and clear on her key points and messaging.

The same could not be said for the reporters whose voices and questions were either inaudible or incomprehensible via the teleconference bridge.  Whether they were in the room with her or dialing in like my fellow blogger, John Solomon of In Case of Emergency Blog and I did, it was a real challenge to make out the questions that were being asked to the Secretary.

Hopefully a transcript will appear at some point to help me fill in the blanks, but in the meantime, here is what I learned from the Secretary’s opening remarks and responses to the often unintelligible questions.

Upcoming Travel
The Secretary will be spending the next several weeks on the road with meetings in the UK, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Kuwait meeting with her counterparts in those countries to discuss everything from information sharing; immigration; law enforcement operations; US Coast Guard operations; various agreements between the US and the respective nations she’s visiting; cargo screening/supply chain security; privacy protections and more.

Upcoming Focus – Counter Terrorism
Another focus of her trip and for the next 4-5 weeks will be focusing on the counter-terrorism mission that the US has here at home and with its international partners.  In her words, “There’s lots of work to be done.”

When she was questioned about why she and the Department are focusing on counter-terrorism over the next couple of weeks and whether the threat of something occurring had changed, Sec. Napolitano offered that “the threat is always with us” but that it was also “an ideal time to focus on this as to what’s going on around the world.”

She also shared that she is interested in learning more about the UK’s  deradicalization program that they have working on and what lessons could be learned from their efforts.

PASS-ID is good; “REAL-ID was unreal”
Upon her return to the US she will be focusing on the recently introduced PASS-ID and will fulfill recommendations of 9/11 Commission.  The Secretary described PASS-ID as a “common sense bill” with plenty of “bipartisan support” from the nation’s governors, Members of Congress, the National Sheriff’s Association and other law enforcement organizations.

It was also her view that this legislation would help the country in its “never ending quest to satisfy the mandates of the 9/11 Commission” and allow us to “go beyond them.”

She described the REAL-ID Act as “an unfunded mandate on the states” and as one of the most negatively received pieces of legislation that she had ever seen in her career.

“REAL-ID was unreal.  It wasn’t going to happen. It was dead.”

She seemed pretty clear on her preferences – don’t you think?

The UK and Terrorism
In response to a question about her travel to England, the Secretary observed that in terms of sheer number of incidents, the UK “has had more threats that have materialized and moved forward,” and “It’s important that we lash up with them.”

In terms of actual threats to the UK, the US and others, she shared that, “it’s Al Qaeda,” “copycats,” “wannabes” and others.

“My view is we have to stand in a constant state of readiness.”

She also observed that, “we can’t put the United States under a bubble.”

“How we share information is important” and, “terrorism can occur in different ways as we have seen.”

Cyber Security
In response to a question about cyber security and the role of the Pentagon, its newly announced Cyber Command; the establishment of the White House Cyber Security Advisor and DHS’ role, Sec. Napolitano reinforced the fact that DOD will have the lead over the entire .mil Internet domain.  For its part, DHS would lead on the .gov (non-military side of government) as well as the private sector and the .org domains as well.

In offering her response, the Secretary also shared that Phil Reitinger who she tapped to be the Deputy Undersecretary of the Department’s National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) was recruited into his post.  Reitinger was also recently named by the Secretary to lead the National Cybersecurity Center (NCSC) as part of her efforts to consolidate cyber programs within DHS.

As to the role of the newly created White House Cyber Security Advisor, this individual (when named/selected by the President) will play a “purely coordination” role and not be “operational” in any way.

“If there are policy issues to be resolved, [the White House Cyber Security Advisor] will be there to do that.”

Future leadership for DHS’ Information & Analysis Directorate
When questioned about when a new nominee would be named to replace Phillip Mudd who withdrew his name from consideration to be the Chief Intelligence Officer and Under Secretary for Information & Analysis Directorate she said she would give “no time estimate on Phil’s replacement,” but she and her team were “moving quickly to find someone for his position.”

Mexico and National Security
In response to a question regarding immigration and comments by New York’s senior US Senator, Chuck Schumer about wanting to improve “operational control” of the US border, Sec. Napolitano gently pushed back on the questioner stating that she didn’t know what he meant by “operational control” of the border.  In her mind and experience though, we (the US) did not have operational control over the border when over half a million illegal aliens were being captured by US Border Patrol and other law enforcement officers.  That situation has changed dramatically as there are not near the numbers of persons coming across the US border thanks to a number of improvements.  One of those improvements that she mentioned was the much-maligned Secure Border Initiative (SBI).  She explained that a number of the initial problems SBI had experienced have been worked out and that it was fully “operational in the areas it has been deployed.”

“I feel very good about where things are going on the border.”

In terms of the on-going drug war that has been going on in Mexico, the Secretary shared that, “We have a historic opportunity to work with Mexico to go after the cartels….  From San Diego to Brownsville” [TX].

She was careful to point out that the cartels are just not confined to border areas.  “They have tentacles that reach far into communities around the US.”

She pledged that the Department would continue to work with the Mexican government, but it was also committed to working with the state and local law enforcement along the southwest border to keep everyone informed and working together.  She mentioned that there are regular calls with sheriffs and law enforcement personnel.  While she did not say she was part of those calls I got the distinct impression that she probably made it a personal practice of hers to participate in them in some shape or fashion.  It was obvious that the border issue is a personal one for her.

And Then We Got Cut Off
Whether it was the fact that the call was starting to run over its allotted 30 minute timeframe; the Secretary got fed up with the poor audio quality and feedback on the teleconference bridge or someone forgot to pay the DHS phone bill, the Pen and Pad session with the Secretary suddenly ended for John Solomon and me.  While John and I were still on the conference line (he being in NYC; me in my office in downtown DC), there all of sudden was no more Secretary Napolitano or inaudible, mumbling reporters on the other end of the phone.  That meant John and I were out of luck as to asking the Secretary our questions.  Oh well… That’s how the cookie crumbles as Mom would say, but it was still an informative session to absorb and I was grateful to be given the opportunity to participate.

As for the questions I was looking to ask if given the chance – I prepared five of them not knowing what the other participants might ask.  You always need a back-up/contingency plan in circumstances like these and they are offered at the end of this post for your review.

My takeaways from the Pen and Pad:
•    There is no doubt that the Secretary is in command of the DHS ship.  She knows her priorities, she’s focused on working them, and she’s prepared to plow ahead to get there.  Sec. Napolitano is also crystal clear in her direction and feelings on programs and issues.  Once she’s decided on what’s she wants done (after doing her homework), get out of the way.

•    The Secretary is also carrying with her the voices, experiences, hopes and frustrations of her former colleagues, the US governors and law enforcement communities in her new role.  She is keenly dedicated to making sure that whatever the Department does in any of its mission areas that it takes into consideration the prospective impacts (e.g. costs, operations) of the people out in the homeland who have taken on offices and responsibilities to serve their states and communities.

•    Reporters either in person or on the phone need to speak up and speak clearly in order to be heard.  The Secretary had to ask at least one reporter to speak up when he/she was questioning her.  Furthermore, it’s always been my experience that you can’t read lips on a teleconference nor are you understandable if you sound like one of the adults on a Charlie Brown ‘Peanuts’ television special.

Prospective questions for Sec. Napolitano

Immigration Reform
•    With the President meeting with a bipartisan assembly of Congressional Members today to discuss immigration reform and the lingering memories of the two recently failed efforts by Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform legislation, what is your counsel to him having dealt with immigration as a former governor and now as the chief executive officer of the Department vested with border security and immigration oversight responsibilities?

NAO
•    Given Tuesday’s official announcement of shutting the NAO down, what are the lessons learned that you and the Department are taking away from what has been a protracted battle with Members of Congress, civil liberties groups and others about the use of technologies and assets such as those that were to be used by the NAO?

Infrastructure Investments and Inclusion of Risk & Resilience
•    With the Administration’s extraordinary investments in rebuilding substantial portions of the country’s aging and worn infrastructures, can you describe what role if any that DHS has had in working with the Department of Transportation and other Federal mechanisms to see that all hazards risk and resilience concepts are incorporated into investment and construction decisions?

H1N1 Lessons Learned
•    While H1N1 remains classified by the WHO as Phase 6 Pandemic and concerns remain about a possible resurgence of outbreaks here in the US in the Fall, what are some of the lessons learned and shortcomings you saw in how the Department and country dealt with this situation?

Personnel
•    A number of key positions at DHS remain unfilled including the TSA Administrator, Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection, Under Secretary for Customs & Border Protection.  Can you describe the challenge that you have had to fill these important positions?

United We Serve Campaign / CERT Teams and Community Preparedness Grants
•    You, along with a number of the DHS and other Administration leaders, have been quite actively promoting the President’s United We Serve Campaign.  With the admonitions that FEMA Administrator, Craig Fugate has made in some of his recent remarks about improving the engagement and education of the public in disaster planning and response and your own encouragement of families and citizens to make themselves better prepared, do you seen an increase in grant funding and other resources being made available to CERT Programs and other community preparedness initiatives so as to enhance state, local and tribal government resilience?

Posted in Border Security, Counterfeit & IPR, Critical Infrastructure, Cyber Security, counterterrorism | Comments

Registered Traveler – An Idea Before Its Time?

Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009

Supporters of a robust risk management agenda for the Transportation Security Administration received the bad news that Verified Identity Pass, the company that operates the CLEAR Registered Traveler program, abruptly ceased operations yesterday.  VIP cited a lack of funding from its investors for the decision.

Whether Registered Traveler can continue without its primary vendor remains to be seen.  But any company or association attempting to implement Registered Traveler will face an uphill climb with a skeptical TSA which sees Registered Traveler as a distraction from its primary security missions, and with airline opposition, which views Registered Traveler as a competitor to its lucrative amenity programs.

TSA initially supported Registered Traveler during the Tom Ridge era at DHS, as a method to target security resources on less-known travelers and to enable low-risk frequent travelers a consistent and fast security review.  However, TSA washed its hands of RT in 2008, arguing it could never ensure that an unknown “clean skin” terrorist could exploit any security protocol change, leaving Registered Traveler as only a fast-lane program.  Despite considerable public appetite for the program with over 200,000 loyal subscribers, operations at over 20 airports, and some airline partnerships, investors in Registered Traveler apparently saw the lack of TSA support as a reason to place their monetary bets elsewhere.

So unless another Registered Traveler vendor somehow picks up the elaborate enrollment and facilitation infrastructure, starting this morning, it looks like we are in for a system for a while where every traveler will get the same security screening, even if they are willing to pay for a background check and biometric verification, and for the TSA resources necessary to run their checkpoints.  Time will tell whether TSA’s caution was justified, or whether RT was just an idea before its time.

Posted in Aviation and airport security, Border Security, Civil liberties & Privacy, Counterfeit & IPR | Comments

Recap of the Symantec Symposium

Thursday, June 18th, 2009

This week, I attended the Symantec Cyber Symposium.  It was a well organized and first class event.  At a time when there is a bit of a glut of cyber events, this one stood out.

Senator Warner Surprises at Symantec Symposium

The opening keynote address at the  June 16th Symantec Cyber Symposium was given by freshman Senator Mark Warner (D-VA).  My expectations were frankly not high, but I was pleasantly surprised.  I did not know that before going into politics, Warner was one of the co-founders of Nextel.  He was actually quite comfortable addressing a very competent tech audience, and set a great tone for the event.

He began by noting that politics aside, the Obama Administration had set a huge message to the country and the world about the importance of technology.  They did this by the significant appointments they have made (CTO, CIO, and soon coming Cyber Coordinator), and the release of the new Cyber report with a full Presidential address.  Warner also said that as the Governor of Virginia, he had learned that the only way to effect change across multiple government organizations was by technology, procurement, and HR.  So, Obama was tackling the first of those legs.

Warner also pointed out the cyber security had three key embedded issues that must be wrestled to completion.  The first is the development of real public / private partnerships.  This must go beyond symbolism and advice and achieve real collaboration.  The second is information sharing.  He warned that if the Cyber Coordinator gets too wrapped up in the classified NSC (he meant NSS) environment, it would fail.  Lastly he said that the President must deal with Identity Validation, and that he would do so.  Recognizing that this was a third rail issue for many, he said it just had to be done, or we would never achieve security.  He also warned that we could do it now, with reasoned debate, or do it after an “event” when there would be a rush to do “something” and emotions would trump reason.

He ended with short comments on the need for Smart Grids to improve our energy efficiency, and for a serious upgrade of Heath Care IT.

Security Standards Panel at Symantec

The 16 June Symantec Cyber Symposium began its panel discussions with a very interesting topic which concerns many in the Private sector; Standards. The panelists were Eric Hopkins of the Senate HLS & Gov’t Affairs Committee, Ron Ross of NIST, and Tony Sager of NSA.  Together they gave an excellent presentation.

Hopkins led off with a quick notation about the new FISMA reform bill.  He said that they were working to synchronize the numerous cyber related bills be put forth right now, and the needed improvements for FISMA.  He said that it would most assuredly morph into a comprehensive Cyber Bill.

Ross’s comments were more wide ranging.  He reminded the audience that the threats were growing in number, sophistication, and power, and that they were aimed at the private sector as much as the government.  He also said that NIST, DoD, and the IC were collaborating on an effort to collapse the different federal security standards to make them all uniform and equal.  He likened it to a Goldwater – Nichols Act for standards.  Eventually they will also have a Certification &Accreditation process that is agile and updated continuously, rather that every three years as it is now.   He noted that the old (present) methodology of “get penetrated then patch it” was no longer acceptable.  We have to build in both security and privacy protections to enterprise architecture, or we will never get ahead of the threats.

Sager was direct and to the point.  He said that we could build the most secure systems in the world, but they would end up being completely without functionality.  That would not do today.  He also categorically stated that we are never going back to the world of “US Only Technology”.  Those thinking along that line should drop it.

The last comments were actually not directly tech related, and that is telling.  Ross said that it is not just a matter of good secure technology, but that it was education/training, procedures, and leadership that would get us through this.  Sager added that a “well managed network was a tough target”, and that we should have that as a goal today.

The Future of the CNCI

The final panel of the Symantec Cyber Symposium looked at the future of the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative.  Their conclusion was that the CNCI was not comprehensive enough, and did not focus nationally.   The panel had two folks presently in Govt (Susan Alexander, OSD, ASD-NII, and Bill Vajda, Joint Interagency Cybersecurity Task Force), one on the way back into Govt (Bruce McConnell soon to be counselor for DHS), and one former (Bill Crowell, former Dep Dir, NSA).

Alexander discussed the desire of DoD to make this a year of Leap Ahead technology.  Crowell noted that while productivity had increased by more than 50% due to digital capabilities, “we are completely dependant on a system that was never meant to be secure.”  McConnell spoke next and emphasized that we were beginning a migration from CNCI toward the new policy outlined in the recently released 60 day Review Study.  He said that any new policy must define roles, must develop agreed upon rules, and must inject the realism of risk management into the debate.  Vajda made the point that the CNCI really had not been national, but stayed exclusively federal in orientation.  That needed to be changed with the new policy.

Questions lead them to state that we would probably keep the heavy R&D emphasis of CNCI, but that the Einstein program would eventually be dropped due to its complexity.  All emphasized the need for education and increased public awareness.  No one had a good answer for how we would pursue cyber security in the international realm.  One suggestion was the establishment of a US Cyber Representative modeled on the US Trade Rep.  That way they would be part of the Executive Office of the President, but not in the White House.  All seemed concerned that the new Cyber Coordinator not develop an operational focus as that was inappropriate inside the WH.

The final word came that we needed to accept that we needed to do “trusted transactions on untrustworthy networks”.  We were simply not going to eliminate the doubts in many elements of the present networks.

Posted in Counterfeit & IPR, Cyber Security, counterterrorism | Comments

Tijuana’s Drug War

Wednesday, June 17th, 2009

Recently, I spoke with CBC’s “The National” regarding the escalating drug war along the U.S.-Mexico border. While it has not reached such a grave point yet, Mexico could realistically become a failed nacro-state if it does not get control of the violence in its country. The United States, for its own security, should help.

Check out the special report:

CBC News: The National, “Tijana’s Drug War’

When police cracked down on Tijuana’s Arellano Felix cartel, it unleashed a violent turf war between upstart drug gangs that neither the police nor the military can control.

Posted in Border Security, Congress, Politics & PR, Counterfeit & IPR, Emergency Preparedness & Response, Ideology & Public Diplomacy, International, Law Enforcement, Management & Administration, Narcotics, counterterrorism | Comments

Crime, Terrorism, or Insurgency? A Glimpse at the Niger Delta Conflict

Monday, May 25th, 2009

Last month’s annual U.S. State Department Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 made not one single mention of Nigeria’s Niger Delta conflict. This past week, the Nigerian military’s Joint Task Force (JTF) conducted offensive cordon and search operations against the militants of the Niger Delta, including the largest umbrella group known as the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND). The JTF operations were ostensibly in response to the recent series of MEND attacks, which comprised hostage-taking, oil pipeline and vessel attacks, and direct engagements against the Nigerian military. What is occurring in the Niger Delta–crime, terrorism, or insurgency?

The situation the Niger Delta is complex and predates the entrance of MEND in 2006. History and geography, as always, explain much of the current situation in Nigeria. The Delta region, distant from the traditional centers of power in Nigeria, has a history of militancy and underdevelopment (the former not always related to the latter). The predominant ethnic group, the Ijaw community, has been sidelined in domestic politics; as a result, they have been the driving force behind political and military mobilization. Add the black curse of Africa, oil, as well as growing numbers of unemployed youth–and one has a perfect mixture for conflict.

While Western oil companies extract oil from the Niger Delta region, locals have been stealing, or bunkering, oil for quite some time. The difference today is the level of organization and scale involved in this crime. MEND and other militants claim they are fighting for a more equitable distribution of the oil wealth and the release of notable Ijaw figures. This is certainly organized violence that induces fear for political ends. The remaining central question is: can continued full-scale conflict in the Delta lead to the dissolution of the Nigerian government? It may be a stretch to believe that the wild, wild west environment of the Delta will spread to all parts of Nigeria. But one thing is for sure: the motivations, capabilities, and intent of the Niger Delta militants will not wane at the hands of the JTF alone.

The State Department may eventually mention the Niger Delta, perhaps in a future report on human rights abuses as militants claim the Nigerian military has targeted innocent civilians and destroyed palaces and shrines. In the mean time, organized violence will continue to disrupt the follow of oil from Nigeria, weakening the government and U.S. interests while emboldening the militants to continue their acts of crime, terrorism, and insurgency.

Posted in Counterfeit & IPR, Intelligence, International, counterterrorism | Comments

Great Exchanges in the Senate Cyber Hearing

Tuesday, April 28th, 2009

While the debate on the future of cyber security has been underway for some time, one of the world’s great deliberative bodies, the US Senate (in the form of the Senate’s Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee) brought an elevated and informed discussion in today’s hearing, “Cyber Security: Developing a National Strategy.”

The entire hearing is worth the time to watch/listen to the archived webcast, but there were a couple of points that stood out for me.

Alan Paller, Director of Research for the SANS Institute described the type of cyber attacks that have been unleashed upon the US (and as recently reported on US Senate and US House of Representatives computers) as part of a new “asymmetric warfare” that we have to learn to expect, adjust and respond to accordingly.  He then described that when our computers, power grids and other critical infrastructures are attacked by he Chinese (and others), they don’t just come in to steal something and go away.  Instead they look to leave something behind (malicious code, trojan horse, etc.), so as to enable future attacks and disruptions to occur at another point in time.

Sen. Snowe (R-ME), Ranking Member of the Committee then shared a discussion that she and Sen. Lieberman (I-CT), Chair of the Senate’s Homeland Security Committee, had recently had revolving around what constitutes an “act of war.”

She described the scenario that if the Chinese launched their missiles at our power plants here in the US so as to disrupt and/or destroy our power and energy supplies, it would be interpreted appropriately as “an act of war” and we would undoubtedly mobilize our military and security forces to respond accordingly.

When the Chinese launch a cyber attack upon our power grid using malicious code and other methods coming from their keyboards, it is unclear whether that type of assault is comparable to one coming from incoming missile attack.  Even the appropriate measure of response to such an attack is unclear, even if the goal of destruction and disruption is the same as it would be from a missile attack.

In responding to her question, James Lewis, Director and Senior Fellow, Technology and Public Policy Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies shared that cyber is the new weapon of choice of the Chinese and others to attack us and our nation’s political, security, military and economic interests.  The challenge before the new Administration is how to respond and what means will be the most effective in responding back to these threats whenever and wherever they occur.  He stressed that leadership needed to come from the top and the President needed to very clearly state to the world that our cyber networks are an American national resource and would be protected and defended as such.

His closing sentence in his response brought the issue home though, “It’s time to treat cyber like the grown up national security problem that it is.”

Posted in Counterfeit & IPR, Critical Infrastructure, Cyber Security, Emergency Preparedness & Response, Homeland Security Industry & Private Sector, Intelligence, International, Management & Administration, counterterrorism | Comments

Free to Be Someone Else?

Thursday, April 2nd, 2009

Yesterday, the FBI announced that more than 7,000 schoolchildren in Puerto Rico had their identities stolen by an identity-ring supplying illegal aliens with Puerto Rican birth certificates and Social Security numbers.  These aliens then bought “packages” of birth certificates and Social Security numbers and used them to establish themselves in the United States.  With this information, the aliens could get drivers licenses, credit, and, of course, jobs.

This case is a sad reminder of an all too common occurrence.  Every day, in cities all around the country, illegal aliens are using stolen identities to obtain their jobs, sometimes even tricking employers who try to employ best practices.  With stolen identities, even employers using E-Verify are often fooled into thinking that the aliens are legally entitled to work.   This trend is not new.  Over the last several years, one of the most common kinds of identity theft ICE agents encountered was abuse of Puerto Rican birth certificates and Social Security numbers.

Immigrant advocates have often stated that these aliens may not know that the identities that they are using are stolen.  This may be.  But their ignorance does not keep their actions from causing harm to real people.  Identity fraud — even if committed “simply” to get a job, or a drivers license, or credit to buy necessities – often causes significant problems for Americans and legally authorized workers.  In the FBI case, the fraud was especially pernicious.  A five-year old, whose identity was stolen, would not likely have learned of this theft for fifteen years, when she applied for credit and found more than a decade’s worth of damage to resolve.

While targeting egregious employers, DHS and ICE will undoubtedly run into thousands of cases of identity theft, as we did during my tenure at ICE.  In discussing the Obama Administration’s approach to worksite enforcement, DHS has not addressed how they will respond to identity theft cases.  Will they send an alien using a stolen identity on his or her way, allowing the alien to simply re-use the identity?  Or will they take appropriate steps to stop the fraud, and keep an alien from continuing to harm the citizen or legally authorized worker?  DHS cannot afford to turn a blind eye and ignore those who have stolen a five-year old’s identity, or anyone’s identity, for that matter.  The Department’s stated goal of continuing to target the employers is the right approach.  But, in doing so, they must not allow identity thieves to continue to commit their crime, and cause even greater harm to the public.

Posted in Congress, Politics & PR, Counterfeit & IPR, Homeland Security Industry & Private Sector, Ideology & Public Diplomacy, Immigration & Visa Policy, International, Management & Administration | Comments

Can the government compete in today’s underworld of terror and criminal finance?

Tuesday, January 20th, 2009

As the Special Agent in Charge of the Department of Homeland Security’s ICE New York field office from 2003 to 2007, I had the privilege of participating in the supervision of the El Dorado Task Force.  The El Dorado Task Force is the largest multi-agency financial crime task force in the United States.  It has conducted, and continues to conduct, some of the most important money laundering investigations in the world.  Some of my fondest law enforcement memories are associated with El Dorado investigations.

And as good as that task force is, due to the skill and commitment of the agents and law enforcement officers working it, I worry that it’s not enough.

When I managed the task force, I had a nagging belief that some of the criminal and terrorist organizations we were up against were conducting sophisticated money laundering schemes that the federal government lacked the capacity to identify, investigate and neutralize.  Simply put, the government lacked the necessary resources and expertise to compete with the criminal and terrorist minds set on exploiting the ever-evolving complexities of the financial world.

Jeff Stein’s “Spy Talk” article in CQ Politics on “terror finance tracking priorities” this week brought this concern back to mind.

Stein reviewed a recent article in the New York Times by Vikas Bajaj and John Eligion outlining significant Iranian money laundering schemes conducted with the knowledge and collusion of well-known financial institutions in Europe to deceive American financial institutions and law enforcement authorities.  Extraordinary and complex efforts were made to conceal this money, much of which could be directly connected to the support of Iran’s nuclear and missile programs.  The article concludes that “Iran, with years of experience in the game, is unlikely to be knocked much off its stride in the acquisitions game.”

I remain concerned that we (after 33 years as a Special Agent, I still use “we” when referencing federal law enforcement) lack the expertise necessary to compete in this venue.  Because money is the lifeblood of a criminal and terrorist organization, these shadowy and sophisticated organizations will continue to make extraordinary efforts to conceal their assets by developing schemes that they believe are beyond the capacity of law enforcement to investigate.

The federal government must remain competitive.  We need to assess our resources and capabilities in light of each “new” money laundering scheme discovered.

We must develop the necessary investigative expertise by recruiting, training, and maintaining the “best and the brightest” investigators in the complex underworld of money laundering and financial crime.

We must strive to develop closer partnerships with the financial industry to exchange intelligence on emerging money laundering patterns.

Even then, because of changing priorities and resources in the United States, I remain concerned it may not be enough.

Posted in Counterfeit & IPR, Law Enforcement, Terror Finance | Comments

Special Agent Martin Ficke on Counterfeit Drugs

Wednesday, June 4th, 2008

Martin Ficke, Former ICE Special Agent for the New York Region and Security Debrief contributor, discusses the dangers of counterfeit medicines and how they present a threat to personal safety as well as international crime.

Tags: ,
Posted in Counterfeit & IPR, Law Enforcement, Narcotics | Comments

Counterfeit Goods: The Biggest Crime Nobody Is Doing Anything About

Wednesday, February 27th, 2008

I challenge you to guess the crime no one cares to do anything about !

  • It costs U.S. businesses $200 to $250 billion annually
  • It is directly responsible for the loss of more than 750,000 American jobs
  • It has increased from $5.5 billion to approximately $600 billion annually worldwide since 1982
  • It has directly resulted in the death of U.S. citizens, funds terrorism and other criminal activity, undermines our economy and its lifeblood – research and development.

Did you guess counterfeiting? Intellectual property rights? Piracy?

Probably not.

Consider this:

  • The FDA estimates that counterfeit drugs account for 10% of all drugs sold in the United States;
  • The FAA estimates that approximately 520,000 parts installed each year in aircraft are counterfeit;
  • And the Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association has cited violations due to counterfeiting that include brakes made of compressed grass, transmission fluid made of cheap dyed oil and oil filters made of rags.

Not only is this a crime that hurts the American economy — and therefore results in higher costs for consumers — it is also be the cause of serious illness or even death. If a patient is dependent upon prescription medication and is unwittingly taking counterfeit drugs, her life could be in danger.

And yet, these crimes capture little attention in the media and even less in many law enforcement circles.

Outside of sporadic law enforcement successes by ICE, CBP, the FBI, FDA and state/local law enforcement agencies (LEAs), there appears to be no sustained law enforcement effort to combat this growing problem. Most law enforcement agencies dedicate a minimal amount of resources to investigate Intellectual Property rights cases, and unless the affected manufacturers or property owners go to extraordinary measures to counteract the counterfeiting of their products themselves, little or no action is taken.

Microsoft recently announced the completion of an investigation with multiple LEAs that arguably commenced in 2001 with a U.S. Customs seizure in Los Angeles of a shipping container filled with fake software, including 31,000 copies of the Windows operating system. The criminal organization was responsible for about 90 percent of the fake software that Microsoft found between 1999 and 2004. Microsoft pushed the investigation through 22 countries utilizing an internal anti-piracy team to provide LEAs ammunition to conduct raids and criminal cases in the United States, Italy, Canada, Germany, Singapore, Australia, Paraguay, Poland, and China. As one prosecutor stated, the burden is often on the company holding the brand to travel the world collecting evidence, doing undercover work and coordinating with law enforcement agencies.

One of the few remaining U.S. economic advantages is our research and development of products and technology. It is what has driven U.S. economic development for decades. More needs to be done to protect that advantage.

Government needs to dedicate more resources to investigate criminal organizations that are involved in IPR piracy. Manufacturers need to dedicate more resources to protect their investment in research and development. Both need to dedicate more resources to educate the public about this crime, and the fact that, as evidenced by the statistics above, such crime is most certainly not victimless.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Counterfeit & IPR, Law Enforcement | Comments

Narcotics and Counterfeit Goods Operation Linked to Terrorism

Wednesday, November 7th, 2007

The Los Angeles Times reports that a dozen people were arrested yesterday on charges of narcotics trafficking, money laundering and selling counterfeit goods after a two-year counter-terrorism and drug investigation centered in Los Angeles’ downtown garment district.

The link between drug smuggling and counterfeit goods operations with the financing of terrorist activities is well known in the law enforcement community.

(more…)

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Border Security, Counterfeit & IPR, Law Enforcement, Maritime & Seaport Security | Comments

©2008 Adfero Group. All Rights Reserved.