Illustration: Caresse Haaser/Axios

The U.S. still doesn’t have a national cybersecurity doctrine that outlines what would happen to adversaries when they launch cyberattacks against the U.S.

Why it matters: The country's ability to fight back is limited without the overarching doctrine and authority laid out for government agencies. That's a problem given that the midterm elections are coming up, and intelligence leaders have said Russia is showing no signs of letting up on its hacking attempts.

What they're saying:

  • “When you lack a strategy or a doctrine, you don’t have the advantage of deterrence,” Republican Rep. Will Hurd, who serves on the House Homeland Security Committee, told Axios.
  • The concern, as independent Sen. Angus King put it during a recent hearing on election security, is that “the Russians sent in this whole operation in to our election system…and paid no price.”
  • “No one is saying ‘the buck stops here,’” said Democratic Sen. Martin Heinrich.

The impact: The lack of clear lines of authority to respond to cyberattacks — and hacks of U.S. elections — was a big topic at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing last month. Right now the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the Department of Defense all play roles in defending the U.S. in cyberspace.

Here's how it breaks down:

  • The Department of Homeland Security protects civilian and critical infrastructure, which as of last year includes election infrastructure.
  • The FBI is the lead for investigating cybercrimes and disrupting those trying to commit them.
  • The Department of Defense and intelligence agencies play a role “predominantly when you start going overseas,” according to Robert Silvers, who served as Barack Obama's assistant secretary for cyber policy at DHS.
"I’m a very strong advocate of making it very clear who has the lead."
— Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen

What the White House has done without actually issuing a doctrine: The Trump administration said it would roll out a cyber policy within 90 days after inauguration last year, but the action got delayed.

  • Trump did sign an executive order in May that suggested government agencies use private sector cybersecurity best practices, but it was not a doctrine. It also set off a series of cybersecurity assessments throughout the federal government.
  • A National Security Council official said there were no updates to provide on drafting a doctrine.

The questions a cybersecurity doctrine would have to resolve:

  • Should there be a "red line"? “In the digital world, we're going to see someone get very, very close to that red line" but not cross it, Hurd said. “You do want some strategic ambiguity” left in an ideal doctrine.
  • What should trigger a response? A big question, Hurd said, is whether the U.S. needs to find an individual responsible for a cyberattack, or whether it's enough just to determine that a government entity is responsible.
  • What should the response be? Determining what kinds of attacks deserve a digital response and which ones should provoke other responses — like sanctions, indictments, travel bans, or even a physical attack — brings a host of challenges to the conversation, Hurd said.

What to watch in the meantime: Tom Kellermann, the chief cybersecurity officer at the security company Carbon Black, told me he's worried there will be "a cyber reaction" by Russia in response to the latest sanctions imposed by the U.S.

Go deeper

The Biden blowout scenario

Joe Biden speaks at an outdoor Black Economic Summit in Charlotte yesterday. Photo: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

Joe Biden or President Trump could win the election narrowly — but only one in a popular and electoral vote blowout. 

Why it matters: A Biden blowout would mean a Democratic Senate, a bigger Democratic House and a huge political and policy shift nationwide.

Justice's moves ring Big Tech with regulatory threats

Illustration: Annelise Capossela/Axios

The Department of Justice proposed legislation to curb liability protections for tech platforms and moved a step closer toward an antitrust lawsuit against Google Wednesday.

The big picture: As President Trump faces re-election, lawmakers and regulators are hurriedly wrapping up investigations and circling Big Tech with regulatory threats.

Democrats' mail voting pivot

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

Democrats spent the early months of the coronavirus pandemic urging their base to vote absentee. But as threats of U.S. Postal Service delays, Team Trump litigation and higher ballot rejection rates become clearer, many are pivoting to promote more in-person voting as well.

Why it matters: Democrats are exponentially more likely to vote by mail than Republicans this year — and if enough mail-in ballots are lost, rejected on a technicality or undercounted, it could change the outcome of the presidential election or other key races.

Get Axios AM in your inbox

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!