Rep. Grayson Asks If Keith Alexander Is Selling Classified Information To Get $1 Million Per Month
from the because-what-else-are-people-buying? dept
We recently noted that former NSA boss Keith Alexander is running around asking for $600k to $1 million per month for his new "cybersecurity" consulting firm. While some people thought that the number was "low" for banks, that doesn't make any sense. You could hire a lot of really good actual security professionals for that kind of cash. So it made us wonder just what banks thought they were getting for that $1 million. Actual security professional Bruce Schneier wondered that as well, and wondered aloud if the one difference was that... Alexander could give them classified info -- such as where he hid the backdoors in their routers.That statement apparently caught the attention of Rep. Alan Grayson, who has been a vocal opponent of NSA overreach. He's now sent a letter to the Financial Service Rountable to point out that selling classified info is a crime:
Security expert Bruce Schneier noted that this fee for Alexander's services is on its face unreasonable. "Think of how much actual security they could buy with that $600k a month. Unless he's giving them classified information." Schneier also quoted Recode.net, which headlined this news as: "For another million, I'll show you the back door we put in your router."Grayson also demands "all information related to your negotiations with Mr. Alexander, so that Congress can verify whether or not he is selling military or cybersecurity secrets to the financial services industry for personal gain. Sure, it's a snarky move, but there is a point behind it. Alexander can't command those sums because of his actual technical expertise. The reality, of course, is that he's selling his connections to the government. But it certainly raises the question of appearances.
This arrangement with Mr. Alexander may also include additional work with the shadow regulatory firm The Promontory Group, with whom Alexander apparently will partner "on cybersecurity matters." According to Promontory spokesman Chris Winans, Mr. Alexander "and a firm he's forming will work on the technical aspects of these issues, and we on the risk-management compliance and governance elements."
Disclosing or misusing classified information for profit is, as Mr. Alexander well knows, a felony. I question how Mr. Alexander can provide any of the services he is offering unless he discloses or misuses classified information, including extremely sensitive sources and methods. Without the classified information that he acquired in his former position, he literally would have nothing to offer to you.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: alan grayson, backdoors, bruce schneier, cybersecurity, keith alexander, nsa, surveillance
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
"We are not selling classified information. But I cannot reveal further information or millions will die."
Why not?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The $1m per month is for his time and companionship only. Anything else that happens is simply between two consenting adults.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Conflict of interest
1. If he knows of "backdoors" and other vulnerabilities and does not disclose the info to his clients, he is essentially defrauding those clients by deliberately allowing them to remain insecure.
2. If he gives those clients the classified info that would allow them to remove those vulnerabilities, then he is obviously breaking the law, as Rep Grayson noted.
This is not even getting into the unethical nature of a person in Alexander's position doing any sort of security consulting in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Conflict of interest
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Conflict of interest
Put simply, there is no way he can be doing this type of work without selling out his county for profit.
Oh, the irony.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Conflict of interest
What irony? That's what he has been doing all along.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Conflict of interest
As far as the government is concerned, there is no such thing as conflict of interest once you reach a certain level. Look at all of the people who go from the Department of X to head of lobbying the same department (or vice versa).
I'm also familiar with a few high ranking officials that sign million dollar multi-year contracts only to retire with a position at said company doing nothing more than collecting a paycheck.
Of course these sorts of things usually never even raise an eyebrow. I'm suprised to see this one getting any attention at all. Personally, I hope there is a huge example made out of this. Not so much because I don't like Alexander, but because I think this practice is wrong and needs to stop to benefit our country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Conflict of interest... what about the bankers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Conflict of interest
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I wouldn't hire this man at the rate of 1¢ a day cause you can't believe anything he tells you. As a boss, you ask if he's completed his task, are you going to take him at his word? At any time?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just like he handled "terrorism"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Backpay
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: K. Alexander
help the banks secure themselves and not, more likely in my opinion, to improve the NSA's ability to "collect it all" without detection - at a healthy personal profit?
Retirement does not change a persons ethics or morals; especially not someone like Alexander.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: K. Alexander
As you have pointed out, he is ethically challenged and working toward personal profit. Unless the NSA is going to pay him or give him some kind of power as compensation, he doesn't give a rat's a** about their ability to spy. While he was in charge there was the allure of power, but handing information over to the next guy just does not seem to make much sense.
My guess is that he is riding on his prior job title, has no ability to help the banks be more secure (secret backdoors or not, he does not seem like the kind of person who would understand how to plug the holes), and is just looking to bilk some companies out of a lot of money by appealing to the vanity of the CEO's that want to employ the former head of the CIA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: K. Alexander
That's like diagnosing a fried chicken with attention disorder.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: K. Alexander
AKA: an uncontrollable cock.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Evolution of Ethics
2. You must avoid the appearance of impropriety.
3. F*ck it. I'm rich!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Promontory Group
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When leaving his position, i am mostly sure that he had some secret agreements to sign and perhaps a continuing NSL slapped onto him.
So everything he touched should be considered compromised.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]