in cybercommand recently formed up, so now we need other agencies. why shouldn't the responsibility lay with -- lie with cybercommand? >> senator, i do think the responsibility for defending the nation against attack lies within cybercommand out. i think the lead for working with critical infrastructure and helping them defend and prepare their networks should lie with dhs. >> that's a curious logic, general. in fact, most curious. so really, all we formed up cybercommand for was to worry about external threats? is that what you're saying? >> i -- >> so if department of homeland security should take the lead of anything that happens in the united states from outside, but you are still there with your 13,000 people? >> not quite that way. senator, probably i'm not clear enough on this. in terms of dhs' role and responsibility it's working with critical infrastructure and other government agencies on developing the standards in the protocols of how they build their networks and to be the public interface. i think that's the role that we want them to do

cybercommand here today. i thank you for your capabilities in sustaining our future, and i ask that my statement be included in the record, and that's all i have, chairman. >> thank you so much, general. the statement will be made part of the record. we'll start with a seven-minute first round. general kehler, first, do you support the fiscal year 2013 budget request? >> yes, sir, i do. >> general kehler, you made reference to effective nuclear command and control network that needs improvement, i believe, in your opening statement. are those efforts under way to modernize that command and control network? can you describe those efforts a little bit? >> yes, sir, i can. of course, as you know, the nuclear command and control system is composed of many, many parts. there are parts of the nuclear command and control system that are not survivable. there is, however, as part inherent in the nuclear command and control system is a thin line that ultimately would be survivable under any conditions. so that we coul

cybercommand. first, we have to build and train cyber forces, and these are things we're arm and arm on, the key things we have to do. second, we have to have the defensible architecture. you mentioned the 15 those en-- 15,000 enclaves, and the reality is the way they are set up, we would have a much more defensible ark tech cheer, and we're pushing that, and the services help us get there. i think we have to partner with dhs and fbi. the reason that i bridge dhs into this is that i believe we want them working with the rest of government. we don't want to take the people i have and push them over here. i think we want the people we have looking outside, and i think that goes to senator mccain's comments. wears the offensive force, the ones to protect the nation, we have to see what's going on and be prepared to do that. we can give and work with dhs and provide capabilities and technical expertise, and that's growing. finally, i'd add in fbi. they have some tremendous capabilities, they have the l

cybercommand, general keith alexander, testified that the security of our nation against cyberthreats is one of our biggest national security changes. securing our systems is a critical component of -- component of this challenge and i urge my colleagues to join me and our chairman in supporting this. with that, madam speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. >> madam speaker, we have a speak own the other side far colloquy, i reserve at this time to allow him to go next. mr. cummings: i yield to the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, three minutes for a colloquy with the chairman. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for three minutes. mr. connolly: thank you, madam speaker and i thank my friend from maryland, the distinguished ranking member. i rise to ask the chairman, mr. issa to engage in colloquy. and i want to thank chairman issa and appreciate the work he and the ranking member, mr. cummings, and their staff on this legislation, which i think is a thoughtful, bipartisan update to an inf

cybercommand, he told a group in washington that the united states would use cyberweapons against an adversary's computer networks only after officials at the highest level of government improve -- approved the plan. who do you think of that as a strategy? guest: i think that's appropriate. a lot of people don't realize when you can blow up a power generator through the click of a mouse, they don't really think you can do that but you can. and so it's an act of warfare. we have to define in this cyberworld what is an act of warfare here. and i think we have to be very careful when we use that capability, to do so with approval at the highest levels. because it is in my judgment an act of warfare. the challenge is determining what is an act of warfare from a rogue nation or state, can we attribute the act of warfare to bring things down which is essentially what they want to do, shut things down, and do we have good intelligence to determine was that a state-sanctioned act or some rogue operator that wanted to blow things up? so this is going to be the future of warfare. when you talk

in fact, $300 billion of trade secrets are stolen every year, according to the united states cybercommand. this proves we need to make real changes to how we protect our cybersystems. the cyberintelligence sharing and protection act helps the private sector to protect itsselves and its clients from data thieves. if they have the ability to detect these attacks, virus codes before they attack our networks, but right now federal law prohibits the intelligence community from sharing the classified cyberthreat with the companies that will protect us, that control the network, the at&t's, the verizon, the comcasts, those groups. we have the ability to give them the information to protect us and yet -- but yet we have to pass a law to do that and that's why we are here today. the cyber intelligence sharing and protection act will do that if we pass this bill. it will allow them to share the codes with malware and the means to counter the bad stuff with the companies. these companies keep a lookout for these viruses and work to stop them before it is able to attack their system. . company that v