Living-Today: Issues of modern living

COMPUTER SECURITY

The White House is seeking to improve the security of computer systems, but is looking to the private sector to make the necessary changes without new laws from Washington.

That's according to a White House official charged with helping to protect the nation's digital networks.

Paul Kurtz, senior director for national security on the President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board -- which is part of the National Security Council -- told a Washington technology conference that the administration wanted to avoid creating new regulations. "We want to stimulate market forces to find solutions to IT security issues," said Kurtz. "The private sector owns 80 to 90 percent of the critical infrastructure ... so if we don't have buy-in from the private sector we won't get anywhere. We won't have success."

Kurtz later told reporters that the administration also looks to market forces to address software vulnerabilities as opposed to having Congress pass a law establishing liability. The White House does favor, however, a change in the Freedom of Information Act so that companies would be more comfortable sharing information on their problems.

"We support relief from the Freedom of Information (Act)," Kurtz said. "The private sector, corporate America, small companies are saying, 'We want to share information with you (about cybersecurity problems) but we don't want it to come out another hole'."

The administration is developing a national strategy to enhance cybersecurity, which should be ready early this summer. The strategy will be organized in part around different classes of users, Kurtz said, such as home users, large firms and small businesses. It would also look at issues by sector -- such as the finance and transportation sectors -- plus larger issues that impact the nation as a whole.

The plan would address the fact that attacks on U.S. computers can come from anywhere in the world. Efforts will be made to work with other nations Kurtz said, reiterating the White House's support for the Council of Europe Treaty.

The United States signed the new cybercrime treaty on Nov. 23, though full ratification remains to be done.

(Thanks to UPI's Dee Ann Divis in Washington)

SEPT. 11 COMPENSATIONS

New York Gov. George Pataki has spearheaded a campaign to increase the amount of money the victims of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks received from the federal Compensation Fund and while the families may indeed get more, the public campaign has also resulted in a backlash.

E-mails to several groups organized to aid the victims, as well as comments from the public submitted to the Department of Justice, use the word "greed" a lot.

While most people want to help those who have lost a loved one and a breadwinner, the more then $1 million payments seem excessive to some. "I felt your pain and now I feel your greed," has been a comment bandied about on numerous talk radio programs.

More than 2,000 people have written comments to the Department of Justice during the month-long comment period that ended last week. The comments are listed on a Web site but names have been erased.

"I strongly doubt that any of the victims' families will ever want," one New Yorker wrote. "The generosity of the American people has been tremendous. Many of the victims left their families provided for -- indeed, the firefighters and police had tremendous benefits provided for by union contract. The taxpayers have enough burdens. No money should be provided."

Kenneth Feinberg, appointed Special Master to determine how the federal compensation fund would be distributed, has estimated federal compensation would be about $1.6 million per family on average. The federal act designated that life insurance, Social Security and pensions had to be subtracted from the federal payments. However, Feinberg determined that charitable contributions from the more than $1 billion donated in the wake of the attacks will not be subtracted.

People injured in the attacks are also eligible for payments. Those hospitalized for a week or more could receive $25,000.

Many families of high-earners who worked in the financial sector and some firefighters' families had complained that because retirement benefits and life insurance had to be subtracted from the amount, they would receive nothing from the federal funds. Several have said that their hard work to earn good salaries, financial planning and the fact that they paid for life insurance should not penalize them from getting federal compensation.

Many sympathize with the widow who wrote: "My husband went into the tower one, never to return. ... In the grander scheme of things, monetary increments will never replace the loss of my husband. I've been emotionally devastated behind this event."

However, a resident of Short Hills, N.J., wrote, "Provide for the true needs of the families, but don't just give away tax money in a misguided and hopeless attempt to equate dollars with empathy."

NUCLEAR WASTE

Nevada officials are planning to continue with their efforts to halt the development of a national nuclear waste repository in their state -- despite an advisory board's conclusion that there were no obvious reasons to exclude the proposed Yucca Mountain site.

The Department of Energy revealed last Thursday that the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board had found "no individual technical or scientific factor ... that would automatically eliminate Yucca Mountain from consideration as the site of a permanent repository" for the nation's nuclear waste.

"The board's review of the 24 years of scientific study at Yucca Mountain is important, as is the decision on whether or not to address the country's nuclear waste problem at this time, given the impacts to national security, environmental protection, and continued clean-up of nuclear waste," said Under Secretary of Energy Robert Card.

Nevada officials, however, are still prepared to fight Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's formal recommendation to the president to turn Yucca Mountain into a central storage facility for spent nuclear fuel and other radioactive waste from around the country. They've asked a federal judge to set aside Abraham's recommendation, which must be approved first by President Bush and then by Congress.

While the administration says something needs to be done with the radioactive materials currently stored at 131 sites, Nevada insists that the scientific assessment of Yucca Mountain is incomplete.

"It appears that the Department of Energy is the only entity familiar with the facts at Yucca Mountain that does not see your decision as premature," Gov. Kenny Guinn said Thursday in a testy letter sent to Abraham. "If environmental protection is DOE's main concern, perhaps the department should explain to Nevadans why we should tolerate an uncertainty factor of 10,000 in the radiation dose projections for the Yucca Mountain repository system. Our slot machines have better odds than that."

Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman told ABC Radio that pushing Yucca Mountain through would be a political disaster for President Bush. He also accused Abraham of not giving the project an adequate review before announcing his recommendation.

Much of the controversy over Yucca Mountain stems from the half-life of the materials, which will remain radioactive for generations and, critics say, vulnerable to any number of risks -- including floods, earthquakes and deterioration of the containers holding the waste.

(Thanks to UPI's Hil Anderson in Los Angeles)