Share This Page

Cyber security chief: Manipulation of data by hackers may be next threat

| Monday, Oct. 26, 2015, 11:56 a.m.
Justin Merriman | Trib Total Media
Adm. Michael Rogers, who heads the National Security Agency and the U.S. Cyber Command, addresses University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public and International Affairs students, faculty, staff and others at Wesley W. Posvar Hall on Monday, Oct. 26, 2015.
Justin Merriman | Trib Total Media
Adm. Michael Rogers, who heads the National Security Agency and the U.S. Cyber Command, waits to be introduced before speaking to University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public and International Affairs students, faculty, staff and others at Wesley W. Posvar Hall on Monday, Oct. 26, 2015.
Justin Merriman | Trib Total Media
Adm. Michael Rogers, cwho heads the National Security Agency and the U.S. Cyber Command, addresses University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public and International Affairs students, faculty, staff and others int Wesley W. Posvar Hall on Monday, Oct. 26, 2015.

Computer hackers could do more damage than just stealing information they find online, the nation's top cyber security official said in Pittsburgh on Monday.

Computer thieves hit American companies daily, looking for trade secrets, bank account information and the inner-workings of operating systems, said Adm. Michael Rogers, who heads the National Security Agency and the U.S. Cyber Command.

“What happens when nation-states, groups, individuals no longer want to steal data (but) they want to manipulate data — and suddenly we can't believe what we're seeing?” Rogers asked at the University of Pittsburgh.

“Much of our structure is based on the whole idea of trust. If you log on, you can believe what you're seeing. ... (Manipulation) would be huge collectively for us as a nation, but more broadly, the world.”

Rogers spoke for 45 minutes to about 150 students, professors and others at Pitt's Graduate School of Public and International Affairs. He later met privately with officials at the National Cyber-Forensics & Training Alliance on Second Avenue before speaking at Carnegie Mellon University's Gates-Hillman Center.

At Pitt, Rogers spoke broadly about online threats to the nation while calling the NSA a friendlier, more accountable intelligence operation.

He acknowledged that information leaks about the secretive agency have hurt its ability to track terrorists, criminals and foreign threats. Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden released government files about the agency in 2013, leading to recurring news reports.

“I have watched us lose a measure of capability because I'm watching terrorist groups, No. 1, physically change the way they communicate as a direct result of what has been compromised,” Rogers said. “I would argue that's not a good place for us to be in as a nation right now.”

Another impact is that intelligence agency officials now are willing to appear in public and take questions, said Michael Kenney, a Pitt national security professor and researcher.

“This sort of event would not have happened before the Snowden revelations,” Kenney said. “It is a new world for the NSA and for U.S. government intelligence agencies. ... They realize they can no longer be in these protected silos that aren't interacting with the American public.”

Rogers started out by saying the public should trust the agency, and he interacted with people in the audience. He mentioned baseball, and as a Chicago native, he teased about the Cubs' post-season run.

That human touch seemed to be working, said Michael Spring, an information sciences professor who met with Rogers before the event.

“He's a thinking military officer who has children, who understands all of the issues, all of the concerns of the American people,” Spring said. “I think that for whatever reason, he's engaged in an outreach effort.”

The NSA follows the rule of law, Rogers said, but agency officials rarely can talk about what they do for fear of tipping off the nation's enemies.

“Now as a democratic nation, it's our right to argue about what we think about that law,” Rogers said. “Are we comfortable with that legal framework?”

The federal government must protect the free flow of information around the world, Rogers said. Encryption makes his job harder, but he said protected messages are in the best interests of the nation and the world.

Rogers addressed a report by The New York Times about Russian submarines and naval vessels operating near international undersea communications cables. Any activity near that kind of infrastructure raises concerns, the admiral said.

“We believe it is in the best interests of the world to have continuous free flow of information,” Rogers said. “... When we see potential activity around that kind of infrastructure, we stop and ask ourselves, ‘What is being done and why?' ”

The Internet has resilience built into it, but if Russian adversaries could cut enough of the right cables as an act of war, it would have a devastating impact on communications, Kenney said.

“That would potentially be devastating,” he said. “That's akin to a kill switch on the Internet.”

Andrew Conte is a member of the Trib Total Media investigations team. Reach him at 412-320-7835 or andrewconte@tribweb.com.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.