GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Lawmaker criticizes DHS cybersecurity nominee

• 49877
  

  Attacking Bennie Thompson is irrelevant to Charbo's qualifications.

  Charbo admitted in the Congressional testimony that no one had been fired as a result of what is being publicly reported as a chinese hacking incident. That would certainly seem to be within his power to do. The testimony also stated that Charbo initially believed this incident of running password crackers and sending data to chinese web sites was the work of an insider?? The testimony states that Charbo was unable to deploy Einstein network intrusion sensors to protect his own agency's network and may have even personally blocked it. So the person who may have blocked the success of the NPPD's flagship product is now a believer and is being put in charge of the NPPD. And another article on the subject states that "He said one thing GAO recommended would be to encrypt the department's local-area network, but he believes that won't be necessary." If the chinese are truly attacking DHS as the news reports state, this stance doesn't make much sense.

  unknown Posted May 2, 2008 11:47 AM
• 48943
  

  Amazing. All four prior comments turn on the charge against Charbo that he was under Federal investigation; a comment that has since been retracted by this Web site and an edited article substituted for the original.

  NO ONE knows the fine details of the case against Charbo outside a select few people; Bennie Thompson is immune to prosecution for breaking security on the case and thus can get away with making allegations that no one can legally deny - because the exonerating evidence is classified. Bennie Thompson is going through the entire Tailgunner Joe McCarthy playbook in his quest to smear DHS.

  Bennie Thompson's relationship with Lockheed Martin bears looking into before his word on other people's ethical lapses is taken at face value. His showboating sure paid off for them when the contract was put up for bids again.

  Dreyfus Posted April 19, 2008 9:07 PM
• 43387
  

  And, I rest my case. Before the government spends good money for Ethics training, it should determine what the ROI would be. This is a good example of who creates the ethical mess. You can expect the return on this investment to be similar to what he is being investigated for. Apparently, hiring the best qualified wasn't what happened in this instance. Surely there is a candidate pool that exists that includes highly skilled personnel who are not under investigation. What more can be said.

  Retired DOD Business Analyst Posted February 11, 2008 10:45 AM
• 43280
  

  Why, in this age of cybersecurity and the important of protection Government information, would a person who has apparently failed and compromised the job in which he was appointed AND is under FBI investigation be put in such a signiciant role?? A regular computer user on a Government computer and network can get fired for doing much less. Something isn't right.

  Pamela Posted February 8, 2008 8:59 AM
• 43272
  

  Unfortunately, this has been a common pattern throughout the current administration. Fortunately, with only about 12 months or less remaining, there will be little impact.

  Dave Posted February 8, 2008 6:57 AM
• 43214
  

  While I do not know the fine details of the case against Mr. Charbo, couldn't DHS find qualified candidates who were NOT under federal investigation connected to incompetent and possibly illegal activity by a government contractor? Surely there must be someone who could perform in the role until the investigation is resovled. Is this gentlemen one of the "party faithful" who seem to hold lots of political appointments?

  Don Posted February 7, 2008 12:31 PM