a senior White House official who will have broad authority to develop strategy to protect the nation's government-run and private computer networks, according to people who have been briefed on the plan.
The adviser will have the most comprehensive mandate granted to such an official to date and will probably be a member of the National Security Council but will report to the national security adviser as well as the senior White House economic adviser, said the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the deliberations are not final.
The encouraging news here is that the position will sit on the National Security Council. But reporting to the national security adviser as well as the senior White House economic advisor does not sound like a position with much authority. Neither does the fact, if this news report proves accurate, that the cyber czar will have "broad authority to develop strategy."
Having the White House develop IT infrastructure security policy and provide a level of governance across all of the agencies is welcomed news. It's slightly better than what we have now. Which is next to nothing in way of policy and co-ordination.
But where's the stick? How will agencies be held responsible to maintain an adequate level of security and disaster preparedness? Hopefully, we'll find out more details this week with the appointment of the czar, as well as the long-awaited 60-day review of the state of IT security from Melissa Hathaway.