From: San Francisco Chronicle

Daniel Gaynor

An unknown group of criminals had attacked the computer networks of gas  pipeline systems, announced the Department of Homeland Security last month. This  story didn’t make the headlines, but it should have. It represents yet another  brazen attack on the United States using a new form of terrorism: cyber-attack.  In other words, hackers used computers – not guns and grenades – to attack in a  very physical way. In face of these dangers, Congress is debating two  cybersecurity bills in the Senate.

When average Americans think about national security, they picture X-rays or  metal detectors at the airport. We’ve heard about guys with bombs hidden in  their shoes and underpants. But what most people don’t think about are criminals  who strike at Americans from a laptop. Regrettably, they can be just as  destructive as the terrorists that we hear about on the news.

Here’s why.

Remember the New York City blackout in 2003? A power plant in New York City  shut down, and power outages cascaded throughout the Eastern Seaboard and  Canada, affecting 45 million people. It was the second most widespread blackout  in history. Top experts on cybersecurity are saying that this kind of blackout  could happen again – through a cyber-attack. Today, gas pipelines, nuclear power  plants and water systems are all connected to computer systems. If those systems  are hacked, there can be devastating consequences.

The Senate bills represent a real opportunity to reach a bipartisan solution  on cybersecurity. The first bill is supported by conservatives in Congress and  the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the second is backed by a bipartisan group of  senators. Yet, even with the threat of cyber-attack being well established,  partisan bickering may derail real progress from happening.

One of the clearest points of contention is whether to create minimal  security standards for critical infrastructure – like gas pipes, nuclear power  plants and subway systems. The chamber would prefer not to have required  cybersecurity protection for all infrastructure providers, 85 percent of which  are private companies. To the chamber and conservatives, protection requires  regulation, and regulation is always a bad thing. In their view, requiring  infrastructure providers to step up their cybersecurity defense is an added  cost, not a long-term investment in public safety.

The bipartisan bill takes a more realistic approach. It would establish a  base level of cybersecurity for infrastructure providers, fortifying the systems  we rely on – our electricity grid, for example – from cyber-attacks. The bill  recognizes a key fact: Hackers are targeting businesses and infrastructure  providers. Indeed, the cost of global cyber-attacks, at $114 billion annually,  is more than the annual global market for marijuana, cocaine and heroin  combined.

The chamber should know the dangers of being unprepared: In 2010, Chinese  hackers broke into its internal networks, stealing private information on its 3  million member businesses.

This isn’t an issue that just affects America’s businesses; it affects  everything from stoplights to power plants. If we don’t pass sensible  cybersecurity measures, our businesses will keep getting hacked. Or worse, our  national security could be compromised.

The bipartisan bill is the right one. Hackers don’t care if you’re Democrat  or Republican; they care if you have money in your bank account and rely on  systems that they can disrupt.

Daniel Gaynor is the digital strategist for the Truman  National Security Project in Washington, D.C.