security

14.09.2013 counterintelligence, cyber crime, cyber security, Economic espionage, espionage, information security, INSA, insider threat, Risk assessment, security, security threats No Comments

Message to Government and Private Sector: YOU are the reason for insider threats

spy v spyEveryone is missing the boat on the insider threat issue – INSA too…to paraphrase James Carville, “It’s leadership stupid.”

Government and private sector organizations are the primary reason for insider threats – senior leaders and the boardroom grow them internally.

With very minor exception, NO ONE COMES TO WORK FOR YOU ON DAY ONE WITH THE INTENT TO HURT YOU, steal your secrets, or sell your intellectual property.

It’s how you treat them, over time, that turns them into insider threats.

  • You put them in the wrong jobs;
  • You fail to trust them;
  • You make it hard for them to do their jobs;
  • You put asshole/untrained managers over them;
  • You treat them like furniture;
  • You , threaten their existence in your companies and agencies;
  • You kill their spirit; and
  • Then, you wonder why they decide to hurt you.

Want to reduce/eliminate the insider threat? Treat you staff the way you did on day one:

  • Welcome them as a human being;
  • Be aware of how they are cared for in your organization;
  • Show them you care about them and their families;
  • Give them a future;
  • Put r-e-a-l leaders over them;
  • Give them a voice; and
  • Pay them well.

In other words, treat them as you would want to be treated.

Now, why is that so hard?

And, why do NONE of the plans I have seen for combatting the insider threat even mention poor leadership as a factor?

INSAonline.org | 9.12.13 Assessing Insider Threat Programs of U.S. Private Sector http://www.insaonline.org/i/f/pr/9.12.13_InsiderThreat_WP.aspx

 

06.06.2013 CCTV, crime, Information sharing, law enforcement, public safety, security, Technology No Comments

LEIM 37th Annual IACP: Tuesday May 21st 2013

mjd 2a smThis was my second year attending LEIM and certainly the most enjoyable as the setting for this year was the beautiful Fairmont Scottsdale Princess Hotel. Coming from a country (Ireland) that has been deprived of good summers for the last few years, I was overwhelmed by the glorious sunshine.

As I walked around the beautiful grounds of the Fairmont Princess, enjoying the heat, I took in the perfectly manicured lawns, the towering cactus displays and the perfect little bunnies. This was just heaven and so far away from the cold, rainy Dublin I had left some days previous.

I’m glad to say as I write this from my kitchen in Dublin; the sun is streaming in the window, and is bringing back memories of Scottsdale!

I discarded my swimsuit and dressed more appropriately for the Opening Ceremony of LEIM 2013. Scott Edson, the past year’s Chair, opened LEIM with a warm welcome for everyone and a brief outline of the next few days events and sessions. He was joined by Alan G. Rodbell, Chief of Police, Scottsdale and Bart Johnson, Executive Director, IACP; they too gave a brief introduction and welcomed all.

After the opening I went along to my first plenary session of LEIM, The Evolving Role of Technology in Policing. This sessions also included results from the previous days Information Technology (IT) summit. Tom Casady spoke about technology changes over the years and how it changed law enforcement.

  • The telephone was a big innovation from the 1930’s, and is still a critical tool today.
  • Cars and motorcycles changed everything for the average policeman patrolling the street on foot.. Harley Davidson credits Detroit, Michigan as being the first purchaser of police motorcycles as early as 1908. The use of cars and motor cycles by police was widespread by the 1930’s. 
  • Two-way radio with the invention of the Motorola Police Cruiser Radio Receiver in 1936 again changed policing for the better. This was a rugged one-way car radio designed to receive police broadcasts. These have of course evolved into the Police Scanners we know today.
  • In 1968 the first 911 call centre began where people could contact police on a simple but easy number to remember, in an emergency. This highly successful contact is still used to this day.
  • The typewriter was used from the early 20th century and of course has evolved from the 1960’s, to the computers and laptops that are used today.
  • Finally, in 1974, the stun gun was invented. It became an invaluable tool  to subdue fleeing or potentially dangerous persons, and gives officers a less lethal alternative to firearms in many situations. As many lives as it has saved, it is still a subject of controversy, as it’s use has been implicated in some instances of serious injury or death. But having seen its use over the years, and in particular, the British police recently using this device to subdue the two terrorists responsible for the killing of Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich on May 22nd, I do agree with police being armed with them.

Of course technology has evolved from all this, to the brilliance of what we have today. From Cell phones, Laptops, Augmented Reality, Wearable Technology, i.e.: Cameras, Voice Recognition, Facial Recognition, Predictive Analytics, DNA Biometrics, Embedded GPS and to Social Media using Twitter and Facebook as a means of getting information from the public at the time and place of a crime or disaster.

There are a few articles and more information on this subject below:

Stay tuned for a couple more blog postings about the 2013 LEIM Conference.

Thanks…r/Mary

24.12.2012 counterintelligence, cyber security, Economic espionage, law enforcement, public safety, security, Tips No Comments

Signs, signs, everywhere are signs: We have to take better care of each other

signsPop quiz…what do the following have in common:

  • Bradley Manning, US Army soldier who released 750,000 documents to wikileaks
  • Jacob Tyler Roberts, another young man who shot up an Oregon mall
  • Adam Lanza, young man who killed 26 at a Newtown, CT school
  • Marijana Bego, NYC art gallery owner who jumped to her death yesterday

The answer? One or more people knew something was wrong BEFOREHAND.

I am now convinced that EVERY incident, whether it is a tragic shooting, a terrorist act, espionage, or a sole suicide, there were signs ahead of time that something was not quite right with the individual(s) involved.

So what can we do? We have to take better care of each other. When we see signs that someone isn’t quite the way they used to be, call them on it. Ask questions. Take action BEFORE something bad happens.

Scared that you’ll embarrass them? scared you’ll embarrass yourself? If so, just think how you will feel if you don’t take action and something even worse happens…how will you feel then?

  • In Bradley’s case, the Army knew there were reasons NOT to put him in a position of trust, and they did anyway!
  • In Jacob’s case, his own roommate said he acted weird and talked about moving and selling his possessions!
  • In Adam’s case, the school district security officer knew he had disabilities!
  • And, in Marijana’s case, many people around her knew she was erratic and not happy.

I would hate to be in any of those person’s shoes…

so, for 2013, let’s try and take better care of each other, and vow to intervene early, maybe we can save a life.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

r/Chuck

 

11.10.2012 computer security, counterintelligence, cyber crime, cyber security, Economic espionage, espionage, information security, insider threat, leadership, security, security threats No Comments

Why can’t Johnny be good? The making of an insider threat

“When Johnny reports to work for you on Day 1, they DO NOT intend to do you or your organization’s information systems any harm; something happens to them, either in their personal or work life that changes this – the CEO’s or Agency Head must be held responsible for making sure they know what’s going on with all of the Johnnys (and Janes) in their organization to prevent the good people they hired from becoming insider threats.”

While most of the world is focusing on “technology” as a solution to preventing insider threat attacks to organization/agency information and systems, hardly anyone is focused on leadership’s responsibility to create and sustain a work environment that minimizes the chance for an employee to turn into an insider threat.

On October 21, 2012, I had the chance to speak on this issue at the 2012 International Cyber Threat Task Force (ICTTF) Cyber Threat Summit in Dublin, Ireland a few weeks ago; here is a video recording of my presentation, I hope you find it informative and useful.

r/Chuck

15.09.2011 Analysis, law enforcement, security, Uncategorized, video analysis, video analytics No Comments

Video Analysis/Analytics: Can we use it to detect criminal behaviors and activities?

I just found this report published by the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Developed by Nils Krahnstoever, General Electric (GE) Global Research, it describes the development of a wide range of intelligent video capabilities relevant to law enforcement and corrections, and describes features of video surveillance that can help to enable early detection and possibly prevention of crimal incidents.

The study also points out, in a number of places, limitations of the technology, based on response activities and envronmental factors. it’s worth a read, here is the table of contents; you can read the document here Automated Detection and Prevention of Disorderly and Criminal Activities:

 Table of Contents

  • 1 Abstract
  • 2 Executive Summar
    • 2.1 Data Collection
    • 2.2 Crime Detection and Prevention
    • 2.3 System Evaluation and Feedback
    • 2.4 Law Enforcement Relevance and Impact
    • 2.5 Dissemination of Research Results
    • 2.6 Next Steps
  • 3 Introduction
  • 4 Data Sets and Data Collections 17
    • 4.1 GE Global Research Collection
    • 4.2 Airport and “Behave” Data
    • 4.3 Mock Prison Riot Data
      • 4.3.1 Venue
      • 4.3.2 Installation
      • 4.3.3 Camera Views
      • 4.3.4 Calibration
  • 5 Motion and Crowd Pattern Analysis 25
    • 5.1 Multi-camera Multi-target Tracking
    • 5.2 Detection and Tracking of Motion Groups
    • 5.3 Counting and Crowd Detection
    • 5.4 Simple Group-Level Events
    • 5.5 Group Interaction Model
    • 5.6 Group Formation and Dispersion
    • 5.7 Agitation and Fighting
    • 5.8 Advanced Aggression Detection
      • 5.8.1 Feature Tracking
      • 5.8.2 Motion Analysis
      • 5.8.3 Motion Classification and Clustering
      • 5.8.4 Results
  • 6 Identity Management
    • 6.1 PTZ Camera Control
      • 6.1.1 Introduction
      • 6.1.2 Related Work
      • 6.1.3 Experiments
      • 6.1.4 Discussions
    • 6.2 Identity Maintenance
  • 7 Social Network Estimation
    • 7.1 Introduction
    • 7.2 Experiments
    • 7.3 Conclusions
  • 8 Data Collection and System Testing at Mock Prison Riot 2009
    • 8.1 Collection and Testing Approach
    • 8.2 IRB Approval
    • 8.3 Collected Video Data
    • 8.4 Mock Prison Riot Detection and Tracking
    • 8.5 PTZ Control
    • 8.6 Behavior and Event Recognition
      • 8.6.1 Meeting / Approaching / Contraband Exchange
      • 8.6.2 Aggression Detection
      • 8.6.3 Fast Movement
      • 8.6.4 Distinct Group Detection
      • 8.6.5 Flanking Detection
      • 8.7 Performance Evaluation
      • 8.7.1 Sequence “Utah Leader Attack” (Nr. 00)
      • 8.7.2 Sequence “Utah Leader Attack 2” (Nr. 01)
      • 8.7.3 Sequence “Gang Killing other Gang” (Nr. 02)
      • 8.7.4 Sequence “Gang Killing other Gang 2” (Nr. 03)
      • 8.7.5 Sequence “Gang Killing other Gang 3 – Unrehearsed” (Nr. 04)
      • 8.7.6 Sequence “Aborted Attack” (Nr. 05)
      • 8.7.7 Sequence “Aborted Attack 2” (Nr. 06)
      • 8.7.8 Sequence “Gang Argument – Prisoners get attacked” (Nr. 07)
      • 8.7.9 Sequence “Gang Initiation” (Nr. 08)
      • 8.7.10 Sequence “Contraband Exchange” (Nr. 09)
      • 8.7.11 Sequence “Multiple Contraband Exchange” (Nr. 10)
      • 8.7.12 Sequence “Contraband with Fight” (Nr. 11)
      • 8.7.13 Sequence “Blended Transaction” (Nr. 12)
      • 8.7.14 Sequence “Shanking followed by Leaving” (Nr. 13)
      • 8.7.15 Sequence “Gang Hanging Out Followed By Several Fights” (Nr. 14)
      • 8.7.16 Sequence “Fight Followed by Guards Leading Offender Off” (Nr. 15)
      • 8.7.17 Sequence “Fight Followed by Guards Leading Offender Off” (Nr. 16)
      • 8.7.18 Sequence “Contraband – Officer Notices” (Nr. 17)
      • 8.7.19 Sequence “Argument Between Gangs – Officer Assault” (Nr. 18)
      • 8.7.20 Sequence “Contraband exchange followed by guard searching inmates” (Nr. 19)
      • 8.7.21 Sequence “Prisoner being attacked and guard intervening” (Nr. 20)
      • 8.7.22 Sequence “Fight breaking out between gang members and officers breaking it up” (Nr. 21)
      • 8.7.23 Sequence “Fight between gangs. Guards breaking fight up” (Nr. 22)
      • 8.7.24 Sequence “Fight between gangs. Guards breaking fight up” (Nr. 23)
      • 8.7.25 Sequence “Gangs fighting. Guards breaking fight up.” (Nr. 24)
  • A Public Dissemination
  • B Reviews and Meetings
    • B.1 Technical Working Group Meeting
    • B.2 Kick-Off Meeting at NIJ
    • B.3 Sensor and Surveillance Center of Excellence Visit
    • B.4 2008 Technologies for Critical Incident Preparedness Expo (TCIP)
    • B.5 Mock Prison Riot 2009
    • B.6 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision 2009
  • C Mock Prison Riot Data
    • C.1 Data Recorded while Processing
    • C.2 Sequences Processed in Detail
    • C.3 Data Recorded without Processing
  • D Techinical Details of the PTZ Camera Control
    • D.1 Problem Formulation
    • D.2 Objective Function
      • D.2.1 Quality Measures
      • D.2.2 Quality Objective
      • D.2.3 Temporal Quality Decay
    • D.3 Optimization
      • D.3.1 Asynchronous Optimization
      • D.3.2 Combinatorial Search
  • E Techinical Details of Social Network Analysis 110
    • E.1 Building Social Network
      • E.1.1 Face-to-Track Association via Graph-Cut
    • E.2 Discovering Community Structure via Modularity-Cut
      • E.2.1 Dividing into Two Social Groups
      • E.2.2 Dividing into Multiple Social Groups
    • E.2.3 Eigen-Leaders

 

30.08.2011 cyber security, Evaluation, information security, iso/iec 27001, security No Comments

NOWHERETOHIDE.ORG completes ISO/IEC 27001:2005 Lead Auditor (TPECS) competency

The British Standards Institute (BSI) issued ISO/IEC 27001:2005 Lead Auditor (TPECS) certificate to Chuck Georgo today. ISO/IEC 27001

ISO/IEC 27001 is an Information Security Management System (ISMS) standard published in October 2005 by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).

ISO/IEC 27001 formally specifies a management system that is intended to bring information security under explicit management control. Being a formal specification means that it mandates specific requirements. Organizations that claim to have adopted ISO/IEC 27001 can therefore be formally audited and certified compliant with the standard.

NOWHERETOHIDE will be publishing a series of blog posts over the next few weeks to help educate organizations about the standard, its criteria, and strategies for achieving compliance.

It is important to understand that ISO/IEC certification is not a one-off exercise. To maintain the certificate the organization will need to both review and monitor the information security management system on an on-going basis.

 

02.06.2011 computer security, cyber security, data sharing, Information sharing, law enforcement, Law enforcement information sharing, LEIS, security, security threats, Uncategorized No Comments

Security, Privacy, and Innovative Law Enforcement Information Sharing: Covering the bases

So it’s no great revelation that public safety has benefited greatly from public private partnerships, and I’m cool with that, especially when we are dealing with technology that saves lives. However, a press release hit my email inbox today that made me think of the risks to security and privacy when we implement innovative technologies.

Before I get into the story it, let me be v-e-r-y clear…I am NOT here to debate the effectiveness or morality of red-light/speed enforcement systems, nor am I here to cast dispersions on any of the organizations involved in the press release…this blog posting is strictly about using the Gatso press release to emphasize a point about security and privacy – when we engage in innovative law enforcement technology solutions, we need to take extra care to adequately address the security and privacy of personally identifiable information.

Here’s the press release from Gatso-USA:

GATSO USA Forms Unique, Strategic Partnership with Nlets

Earlier this month, GATSO USA was approved as a strategic partner by the Board of Directors of the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (Nlets). Nlets is….general narrative about NLETS was deleted. The approval of GATSO is an exciting first for the photo-enforcement industry.

Nlets will be hosting GATSO’s back office and server operations within the Nlets infrastructure. GATSO will have access to registered owner information for all 50 states plus additional provinces in Canada. The strategic relationship has been described as a “win-win” for both organizations.

From Nlets’ perspective, there are key benefits to providing GATSO with hosted service. Most importantly, it virtually guarantees personal data security. Due to this extra step of storing personal data behind the DMV walls of Nlets, the public can be assured that security breaches — such as the recent incident with PlayStation users — are avoided.

From GATSO’s perspective, hosting the system with Nlets will provide a ruggedized, robust connection to comprehensive registered owner information — without the security issues faced by other vendors in this industry. Nlets was created over 40 years ago…more stuff about NLETS was deleted).

The main points I took away from this press release were:

  1. Nlets is going to host the back-end server technology that GATSO needs to look up vehicle registration information of red-light runners;
  2. Gatso is going to have access to vehicle registration information for all vehicles/owners in ALL 50 states in the U.S. and (some) provinces in Canada; and
  3. And, because it’s behind Nlets firewalls, security is not an issue.

Again, please don’t call me a party-pooper as I am a huge advocate for finding innovative ways to use technology to make law enforcement’s job easier. However, I am also painfully aware (as many of you are) of the many security and privacy related missteps that have happened over the last few years with technology efforts that meant well, but didn’t do enough to make sure that they covered the bases for security and privacy matters. These efforts either had accidental leakage of personal information, left holes in their security posture that enables direct attacks, or created opportunities for nefarious evil-doers with legitimate access to use that access to sensitive information for other than honorable purposes.

After I read the press release, I thought that it would be a good case-study for the topic of this blog – it involved innovative use of technolgy for law enforcement, a psuedo-government agency (Nlets), two foreign-owned private companies, and LOTS of PII sharing – some might even say it had all the makings of a Will Smith movie. :-)

To help set the stage, here are a few facts I found online:

  • Gatso-USA is a foreign company, registered in New York State, operating out of Delaware; its parent company is a Dutch company, GATSOmeter BVGatso.
  • Gatso does not appear to vet all of the red-light/speed violations itself; it uses another company – Redflex Traffic Systems to help with that (Redflex is not mentioned in the press release).
  • Redflex seems to be a U.S. company, but it has a (foreign) parent company based in South Melbourne, Australia.
  • Finally, there are no-sworn officers involved in violation processing. Red-light/speed enforcement cameras are not operated by law enforcement agencies; they outsource that to Gatso, who installs and operates the systems for local jurisdictions (with Redflex) for free, (Gatso/Redflex is given a piece of the fine for each violation).

There are no real surprises here either; there are many foreign companies that provide good law enforcement technologies to jurisdications across the U.S., and outsourcing traffic violations is not new…BUT what is new here is that a sort-of-government agency (Nlets), has now provided two civilian companies (with foreign connections) access to Personally Identifiable Information (PII) (vehicle registrations) for the entire U.S. and parts of Canada…should we be worried?

Maybe; maybe not. Here are nine questions I would ask:

  1. Personnel Security: Will Nlets have a documented process to vet the U.S. and overseas Gatso and Redflex staff who will have access to this information through direct or VPN access to Nlets systems?
  2. Data Security: Will Gatso or Redflex maintain working/test copies of any of the registration information outside of the Nlets firewall? If so, are there documented ways to make sure this information is protected outside the firewall?
  3. Data Access: Will Gatso/Redflex have access to the entire registration record? or, will access be limited to certain fields?
  4. Code Security: Will any of the code development or code maintenance be done overseas in the Netherlands or Australia? If so, will all developers be vetted?
  5. Network Security: Will overseas developers/site suport staff have access to the data behind Nlets firewalls? What extra precautions will be taken to protect Nltes systems/networks from abuse/attack?
  6. Code Security: Will Nlets conduct any security testing on code loaded on the servers behind their firewalls?
  7. Stakeholder Support: Have all 50 U.S. states, and provinces in Canada, been made aware of this new information sharing relationship? Do they understand all of the nuances of the relationship? And, are they satisfied that their constituents personal information will be protected?
  8. Audit/Logging: Will all queries to vehicle registration information logged? Is someone checking the logs? How will Nlets know if abuses of authorized access are taking place?
  9. Public Acceptance: How do states inform their constituents that their personal vehicle registration information is being made available to foreign owned company? Will they care?

How these questions are answered will determine whether or not we should worry…

Did I miss any other important questions?

Beyond this particular press release and blog posting, I suggest that you consider asking these kinds of questions whenever your agency is considering opening/connecting its data systems to outside organizations or private companies—it may just prevent your agency from becoming a headline on tonights news, like St. Louis –> St. Louis Police Department computer hacked in cyber-attack .

The bottom-line is that whenever you take advantage of opportunities to apply innovative technologies to public safety, make sure that you cover ALL the bases to protect your sensitve data and PII from leakage, direct attacks, or misuse and abuse.

As always, your thoughts and comments are welcome.

r/Chuck

27.09.2010 public safety, security, security threats, Training, Uncategorized No Comments

Eastern Maryland: Free “State of-the-Threats for the Hospitality “Industry”

A free InfraGard Maryland training seminar:

Date and Time: Monday, October 4, 2010, 8:30am-1:00pm in Ocean City

Location: Holiday Inn, Oceanfront @ 67th Street, 6600 Coastal Hwy., Ocean City, MD 21842

AN AUTHORITATIVE “NEED_TO_KNOW” ON THE STATE-OF-THE-THREATS MATRIX FOR THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY – with Lessons Learned from Mumbai & BEYOND

Jointly presented by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and InfraGard’s Maryland Chapter, with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Maryland Coordination & Analysis Center (MCAC) and Eastern Maryland Regional Information Center.

Speakers

Major General Kalugin, The former Chief of KGB Foreign Counter-Intelligence whose job it was to penetrate all hostile intelligence and security forces worldwide. Now one of Russia’s “Most Wanted,” General Kalugin just celebrated his 7th year as a U.S. Citizen. He is the ultimate insider, whose fascinating autobiography, SPYMASTER*, documents secrets from his 32-year career.

Carl D. “Dave” Dalton, Former 29-year veteran LAPD, a sought-after source in the Security Industry for executive protection, high-profile/high-risk event security, emergency & disaster preparedness, Mr. Dalton has weathered unimaginable events: from the LA 1984 Summer Olympics and first-ever Papal visit in 1987, to the 1992 LA Riots; the Northridge Earthquake; firestorms, floods, and mudslides; epic structural fires; and major crime scenes. Heavily involved in the community in various key Security & Emergency Preparedness roles, he was personally invited by the Government of the People’s Republic of China to help prepare the Chinese National Police and Military to provide security for the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics.

Darryl Kramer, Public-Private Sector Partnership Coordinator, Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence & Analysis. Mr. Kramer draws on a deeply informed and credentialed background in military and other sectors to bring a substantial breadth of understanding and resourcefulness in speaking to a State of the Threats Briefing and overview of the DHS Public-Private Sector partnering program – how it works, & how businesses can benefit.

Registration & Attendance: This invaluable event is FREE to Attend

REGISTER NOW at http://secureeastmd.eventbrite.com

27.09.2010 computer security, cyber security, Economic espionage, SCADA, security No Comments

Web ‘superbug’ threatens Chinese national security – Stuxnet SCADA Attack

Caught this article in Times of India  (PTI, Sep 27, 2010, 01.29pm) website today…funny it didn’t make any of the U.S. cyber security sites…here’s a couple snippets…

“A sophisticated malicious computer software, is attempting to infiltrate factory computers in China’s key industries, threatening the country’s national security, cyber experts have warned.”

“Called Stuxnet, the worm was first discovered in mid-June and was specially written to attack Siemens supervisory control and data (SCADA) systems commonly used to control and monitor industrial facilities – from traffic lights and oil rigs to power and nuclear plants, the state-run Global Times daily reported quoting experts.”

“Globally, the worm has been found to target Siemens systems mostly in India, Indonesia and Pakistan, but the heaviest infiltration appears to be in Iran, the report said. According to Wang, there might be large financial groups and nations behind the malicious software.”

“Eugene Kaspersky, co-founder of security firm Kaspersky said the Stuxnet worm could prove that “we have now entered the age of cyber-warfare. – He believes that Stuxnet is a working – and fearsome – prototype of a cyber-weapon that will lead to the creation of a new arms race in the world.”

Read more: Web ‘superbug’ threatens Chinese national security – The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/news/internet/Web-superbug-threatens-Chinese-national-security/articleshow/6635680.cms#ixzz10lUJux3C

27.08.2010 Economic espionage, infragard, security, security threats No Comments

Maryland InfraGard Presents: “Need to Know” Security/Threats Awareness Event

This event, generously hosted by DCS Corp, one of Southern MD’s most engaged community stakeholders, is being jointly produced by the Maryland InfraGard Chapter, the Southern Maryland Industrial Security Awareness Group, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Maryland Coordination & Analytic Center (MCAC) and Southern MD Regional Information Center (RIC), in cooperation with regional authorities.

  • DATE: September 21, 2010
  • TIME: 8:00 am – 1:00 pm
  • LOCATION: DCS Corp, 46641 Corporate Drive, Lexington Park, MD (There is plenty of free parking available.)

REGISTRATION: You must be registered to attend. Go to http://securesouthmd.eventbrite.com. The Deadline to register is Friday, September 17th. Admission is FREE and open to U.S. Citizens (bring valid photo ID).

SPEAKERS:

Ex-KGB Major General (ret.) Oleg Danilovich Kalugin — former Chief of KGB Foreign Counter-Intelligence whose job it was to penetrate all hostile intelligence and security forces worldwide. Now one of Russia’s “Most Wanted,” General Kalugin just celebrated his 7th year as a U.S. Citizen. He is the ultimate insider, whose fascinating autobiography, SPYMASTER*, documents secrets from his 32-year career.

* Pre-Order your autographed copy of SPYMASTER by September 17 - a limited number of copies are available for personal inscription — an historic takeaway and remarkable value at $20. Proceeds benefit InfraGard Maryland Members Alliance, a MD chartered 501(c)(3) nonprofit, in its mission of public-private partnering for critical infrastructure protection, and programs like these. Ordering & payment details are on the registration site, or contact M. L. Kingsley at MLKingsley@msn.com to arrange your personally inscribed copy. Subject to supply, copies will also be available for purchase by cash or check at the 9/21 event.

Noted Cyber Guru Dr. Gary Warner — voted Nation’s top Cyber-blogger – See http://garwarner.blogspot.com/ “Cyber Crime and Doing Time” – Dr. Warner is the Director of cutting-edge Computer Forensics Research at the University of Alabama, Birmingham.

Plus, representatives from InfraGard, the FBI, MCAC, and RICs will speak on reporting suspicious activity, information sharing ventures and private sector partnerships.

This jointly presented forum represents an unparalleled gathering of public safety, law enforcement & intelligence authorities, to teach the crucial lessons of situational awareness, promote learning and sharing between essential stakeholders using a collaborative process to improve intelligence sharing and, ultimately, to increase our collective ability to predict, prevent, and preempt terrorist activity and manage the consequences of a diverse number of threats.

For more information about InfraGard, and to join, go to www.infragard.net and/or www.infragardmembers.org, or contact Special Agent Lauren Schuler, FBI Baltimore’s InfraGard Coordinator, at 410-265-8080 or Lauren.F.Schuler@infragard.org.

We hope to see you there!


Send us your comments and questions

Map IP Address