chamber of commerce is hosting an infrastcture conference with biden administratn officials and state and local leaders. then at 3:00, the senate returns to consider the nomination for us permanent representative to the united nations educational, scientific, and cultural organization. on c-span 3 and 4:30 pm a hearing to examine the 2,025 budget request for the va's office of information and technology. you can watch our live coverage on the c-span now video apps or online, c-span.org. >> the house will be in order. >> c-span tolerates 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979, we've been your source for capitol hill, providing unfiltered coverage of government taking you to where the policy is debated and decided with the support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting,

powered by cable. next, a look at us cyberstrategy and policy with the director of the cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency, jen easterly, and us ambassador at large for cyberspace and digital policy, nathaniel fix and other federal officials. they also discussed artificial intelligence and challenges from adversaries like china and russia. from the atlanta counsel, this runs an hour. ♪♪

>> good afternoon. my name is graham bookie, vice president of technology programs at the atlanta counsel. welcome to the discussion and the dc launch of the department of state's first ever international cyberspace and digital policy strategy. this is an exciting conversation, america's top diplomat, and techies in san francisco as opposed to foreign capital. and highlighting increasing centrality for the role in the world. a comprehensive outlook and more importantly an affirmative plan in a near increasing geo. will competition the dizzying

rapid technological change. it includes guiding principles in four areas of actions that combine lines of efforts for digital solidarity. and shaping the global future together. i say that every single day. and and a newly formed capacity building deeply aligned with the strategy. and the central part of this is behind it as the department of state, organizers around the strategy and secretary blinken announced the creation of a new

bureau of digital policy, and specifically technology and america's foreign policy apparatus and digital economy, and working across the us government, implementing an ambitious strategy. ambassador at large, jen easterly, the cyber security in a for stricter security agency at the department and homeland security and alan davidson, and administrator for national telecommunications and information, saying the full

title. thank you for the distinguished panelists and thank you for those who joined in person and online. feel free to ask them. very excited to get into this. first ever strategy, that was the main organizing function and the main energy behind it. >> and thanks to the atlanta counsel. and the great colleagues on this issue. the 3 of us are here, and not

nearly the department of state. it came in the end daa. some things have changed, and the geopolitical landscape in the intervening years. this strategy was intended. a typical christmas tree, and decision making and policymaking and implementation, and in the tech domain.

and rights respecting for lunar technology. and what they opt into. within that framework, they recognized in the rationale for this group here. previous strategy like this one talked about cybersecurity, can't talk about cybersecurity without talking about the policy related to undersea cables and satellites and data centers. for computing and artificial intelligence. another guiding principle here

is affirmative vision. this strategy does not want a future that is characterized by a balkanized internet and if that's the future we are moving towards it is incumbent upon us to offer a positive firm, inclusive vision that they can opt into. >> one could be forgiven for causing this a cyber strategy which a lot of headlines around the rollout, the new cyber strategy incorporates, goes far beyond that to your point. i turn to jen for a question, the actual cyber element of it which is international strategy and you work at the department of homeland security. how do you see the role in

international strategy especially on critical infrastructure and cybersecurity and beyond that. how is that going? >> congratulations to nate for the strategy and then particular forgetting matthew broderick at the rollout, starting two of my favorite hacker movies, wargames and ferris buehler's day off. the department of homeland security, cyber knows no boundaries. everything we do as a partnership agency, whether that is through industry, academia, the research community and international partners and that is why having us here on stage, we have a role in defending cyberspace which is inherently global and

international and that is why i was glad to be here. even more to the point about critical infrastructure. i was at morgan stanley, you think about just the interconnectivity, interdependence and vulnerabilities to critical infrastructure which is very global. morgan stanley, financial institution and 40 one countries, head of the center that had 8 locations around the world and the private sector company, we had to be able to work with partners around the world including governments, including regulators and it shows critical infrastructure, the international component is foundational while nate was rolling out the cyber and

digital strategy, when meeting australian counterpart, south korean, ukrainians tomorrow and because we have to operate with the visibility at each of the partners around the world who see cyberspace from their own perspective, we have to come together to connect the dots across the world so we can understand the risk broadly, to like-minded nations, international partnerships, at america's cyberdefense agency. >> i will turn to alan. houses and tia play in particularly with industrial policy side and multi-stakeholder relevant of internet governance, where does that play into international strategy? >> thank you for having me as well and congratulations to the

whole team for quarterbacking articulation of strategy at the federal government approaching cyberspace, guided by the idea of building technology in a way that keeps people's lives better and promote human progress. so much of what we do in policy space is touched on in this strategy. this full stack approach to the issues in front of us, whether it is how do we build a broadband infrastructure at home and around the world, doing good internet governance, think about issues like privacy or ar policies, governance principles, generally for these technologies and all that is work we are doing informed by and needs to inform our

international global strategy as well. >> an effective international policy can start with a solid approach to domestic issues. we have worked, this administration is working on a solid foundation at home on these issues, in the process of administering $50 billion worth of funding that bridged the digital divide in this country, make sure everybody who doesn't have an internet connection can get one by the end of this decade. this will make the country more resilient and inform how we think about deployment around the world, how to help other countries as they think about the internet as a tool for developing and deployment. issues like investing in multi-stakeholder model,

internet governance, globally, part of how to approach domestically, fitting with our approach globally and it is great to have a strategy that articulates a good vision going forward. >> two of the common threads we picked up through the strategy are the concept of making sure we have an affirmative vision just and articulation of a long list of things we stand against especially when it comes to tech policy and not tech policy as one thing but something that increasing debit increasingly touches on everything as well as this need to bridge how we design technology at home, in areas around the world. to agree on every single element of policy.

there's a lot of room for collaboration and communication. and a conceptual retort, something we are for to things like the systemic approach from ccp or china as well as russia or authoritarian systems and their approach to how technology was designed and governed and communicated around the world. do you mind unpacking digital solidarity? >> what is essential to recognize here, one phrase, look at what is in and also its negative image. something that's not in this

strategy is the descriptor like-minded in classifications of groups. this is not an attempt to bifurcate or fragment and an attempt to provide an affirmative vision, unifying set of principles around rights respecting development and use of technology that can bring others, the vast middle, the billions and billions of people in the world who do not live in states that align with the united states and do not live in states that necessarily have a strongly different conception of the future. digital solidarity, to the notion of digital sovereignty which is something we are

hearing more and more. i use the term deliberately, allies and partners. digital sovereignty can be attractive. it is more than a seductive mirage. the obligations to its citizens, it tries to make sense of the reality that these issues are intrinsically cross-border and we do in the world today face a different set of actors with a different role of technology in the world. as jim said, so much of what we

are doing in the united states actually is of great interest to partners. offering up what they do is on the top five list of things we get requests for all the time. our foreign policy can often only be as strong as domestic policy. the approachs the united states takes to broadband at home directly underpins whatever moral authority or legitimacy to advocate for these principles. >> there is one component, a new pledge, which we are big nerds on the atlanta counsel. can you share that effort and specifically how it plays into

your international engagement? >> i don't think you need to self identify. i have known graham for many years. let me make one point to what nate said. nate and i traveled to ukraine together. one of the things about taking that trip together, going to ukraine, poland, was just the optics of the top cyber technology diplomat and cyber defense agency together leveraging multiple instruments of national power in a way that messages our full support for information sharing, collaboration, capacity building. is a powerful symbol, you wind the clock back to five years ago, there was no hero of

cyberspace and digital policy. some of the advancements that have been made, that i think are fundamentally helping to bring greater security and resilience to cyberspace. one of the big things we've been focused on over the past year is this idea of secure by design which is an international concept going to the first principle of a resilient ecosystem and it really is a tremendous effort that is a tough one. i call it secure by design revolution. what we are trying to do is focus, to make up for decades of technology being built for speed to market and futures and not security, go back to the days when the internet was first invented and folks

involved in inventing, the pioneers, security was never in our minds at that time. it is at the top of priorities, the products we use every day, our foremost states and secure in us, we are excited to have 68 of the world's leading software, technology manufacturers sign on to this pledge that says they commit to 7 key areas of building security into their products, that's just a pledge. the beauty to me is rooted in

the principle of radical transparency which is having specific things the companies are committing to as well as evidence that shows effectively implemented these 7 areas, and you all are interested in it. it is important we recognize that this is absolutely a global endeavor and when we put out our principles on security by design, we are proud to join arms with international partners including the second version of an and 13 of international partners that we launched for cyberwe can. to me, making sure the technology we rely upon is as safe and secure as possible is truly the only way to catalyze the sustainable and scalable

approach to a cybersecure ecosystem around the globe. >> the secure by design issue is an interesting issue because it is a could go point of national cyberstrategy and a critical point of international strategy that bridges together a bunch of things. importantly, it includes a number of international government partners but industry partners are not just us companies which is a reflection of how the space is growing. this year is a global election year, we won't have more elections since 2038 and around the world is a blessing. and we have the digital compact. it is free and interoperable.

to keep internet in the multi-stakeholder. and how important are those processes, how we are engaging in those. >> the growth of the internet itself is a testimony to the power of multi-stakeholder models, the motion of people, good faith, diverse communities coming together in the spirit of solving problems of common interest. these models of bringing together expertise of the private sector, academia, civil

society to solve the hard problems that the internet places. part of what made the internet successful, it lends itself to making hard decisions, building infrastructure in the face of rapid technological change. whether it is at ietf standards bodies, the i can organization, names and numbers, across-the-board we had organizations that have been incredible to our success, that has been very decentralized without being governed by any single government or governance structure. that model is increasingly questioned around the world. in part we have really hard,

there have been authoritarian regimes that wanted to undermine the model, trying to seek more control, more centralization in internet governance. it can be a little friendly fire. sometimes it is like-minded countries that are themselves in the spirit of trying to solve problems doing things that might undermine this multi-stakeholder model and we face a year where there are increasing questions of the global digital compact is when it should've. the future of some of these existing structures is out there. one of the things that is so important about this strategy is articulation of a positive vision. we are doubling down on the importance of openness, doubling down on the notion, as

a powerful tool for solving problems in the spirit of solidarity, you look at the problems we have, governance, how to deal with, questions that have come up, is working together for hard problems, a way to bring in broad communities to solve hard problems in a way that's faithful to our values and the moral authority we bring to the world. >> a follow-up which is asked anonymously by the way, how do you anticipate groups interacting with principles articulated in the strategy when it comes to the multi-stakeholder system to include those groups.

and where are they great partners in these efforts, how do you see that working. >> let me get specific on a specific, how these processes unfold into the earlier question. broadly, my first trip in this, running up to the election for the secretary-general of the telecommunication union. the first mission in this role, focused on governance issues. for a meeting for the un's first committee, deliberative body that created the framework, the thread

connecting those two days is, international organizations to abhor a vacuum. when the united states stepped back others fill the void. for the operating system, the us has to be engaged, they are functionally distributed for multi-stakeholder, to make that concrete in the last couple years, let's talk about ai. when chat gpt was released in fall of 2022 all of a sudden,

ai became topic of interest for citizens around the world and by extinction, interest for governments, it had been a focus but it is front and center. the white house started with the leading ai developers. voluntary by definition doesn't constrain information, the power of innovation economy is a massive for overall, not want to constrain. they couldn't get sucked into a long torturous legislative process moving so quickly. in a regulatory structure, that gave a substantive meaningful set of principles for ai safety

security and trust to multilateral lies in the g7. it became the centerpiece and code of conduct for ai developers, it was insufficient. what about the g186. probably 186. we have engaged hard to ensure there's a very broad-based discussion about applications for you and sustainable development goals using ai to these metrics, with agricultural productivity and medical diagnostics. the us tables 123 countries

including china cosponsored resolution in the us, for capacity building. we tried hard in the spectrum of international organizations with multi-stakeholder on ai, with the multi-stakeholder side. the atlanta council administers the ai connect program. to ensure representatives for low and middle income countries for discussions around ai governance. a lot of vectors here, and people in academia to engage in that.

>> it gets very clear that we want responsible ai innovation, only going to deal in a clear eyed risk that it poses. to get there, we also know we are going to need them put from the private sector, civil society at the table, academics and we are trying to create those structures. we are really designed to bring in the best thinking of the private sector before we moved too quickly into this space and i think it is also a good example that it is a much more sophisticated conversation now than we had 10 or 20 years ago in the early days of the internet and social media. we are thinking about a wide range of tools, some are

multilateral, some involuntary commitments and how we build structures that are truly multi-stakeholder and bring in the broad community of expertise, if you compare us to previous generations of governance around new technologies we are engaging with a greater sense of urgency and bringing a broader set of tools in the spirit of digital solidarity we will need to incorporate. >> the ai conversation is an interesting one. the organizing premise of that program is to engage with policymakers based not on what the us stance is or one country but ocd principles so it's a 2-way conversation and 2-way learning that leads to a multi-stakeholder system. you brought up ai so i will ask a couple questions on ari. the ai eo, executive order that is comprehensive, a long

document to read, 200 days with more taskings for you all then we probably know in public. action items on security elements for a lot of industrial policy creating new safety institute working through what does red teaming mean for generative artificial intelligence and showing up to governance which this year has been a year the oecd is tracking one hundred thousand policy initiatives that cropped up across 68 countries and on something like how does a strategy help coordinate these different elements you are working on? i will turn to jen. >> you mentioned the president's executive order.

we have been engaged on this for years. when you think about machine learning, coming out of the executive order, working on a pilot, going to be publishing the results. how to use generative ai for champion -- detection of cyber threats to infrastructure. there is promise affair, we published a document with the department on how critical infrastructure owners and operators manage threats to their infrastructure from artificial intelligence and doing some work on red teaming, we have specific expertise on cyber red teaming and colleagues to do challenges specific to how you combine cyber add teaming and prompt engineering when talking about the integrity and security of ai systems.

we have a roadmap, a full effort on that. i will point to some work we did after the ai summit at the national cybersecurity center in the uk on secure guidelines for development of ai which is part and parcel of this larger secure by design effort we have going on. .. you designed, develop, deploy, test, and deliver technology that puts security first. when you think about ai, which is moving faster than any technology we have seen before, that is more unpredictable, and arguably more powerful, we really need to ensure that even we really need to ensure that even as these capabilities are developing that they are developing responsibly, that technology developers are innovating by putting security as a top priority. so get its that the site of the that needs to take in security

at the beginning, not at the far end. i will follow up on one other thing as nate has been mentioned the importance of working with rights respecting nations. in cyber we have to deal with a lot of natio not rights respecting to include those who very politely go after civilian infrastructure, whether it is russian attacks on ukraine civilian infrastructure, whether it is chinese cyber actors burrowing into our own critical infrastructure here . at home with the intent to launch disruptive or destructive attacks in event of a major conflict or crisis overseas. and so we do want to marshal a collective international global strategy with allies and partners who are focused on ensuring the protection of civilian populations, of silicide more broadly, but also recognize that civilian critical

infrastructure should be off-limits from malicious cyber attacks. and so i think it's important to recognize the context that the strategy is being delivered in, and world, frankly, that is more complex and more dynamic from a threat if i met perspective puts an additional emphasis on how important it is to work with our allies and partners for us all to bring the authorities, the talons, the capabilities together working with the private sector to really ensure the security and resilience of the cyber states we all rely upon. >> we will go on anything else in ai buton i for one specific follow-up on that which i'll come back to any moment. >> i'll just add that even last week the president reiterated his belief that ai is the most consequential technology of our time. and it's going to affect every

corner of our economy. take into huge amount of good for people. d we want and i innovation, ai innovation to happen here at home. we wanted to happen in the west. we wanted to be developed responsibly and so we will need to continue to invest and i think part of what you saw in executive order, that the the present put out in the fall is that investment that's coming in making sure that we have innovation, responsible innovation happening here at home first and foremost. the responsible party is really important and that isim an area where we need to put tremendous investment in. that something is happening also at the commerce department here where my colleagues at mr. becerra stemming up to ai sage institute. we are parts of the department working on intellectual property issues, privacy issues, trade issues, export control questions all of that is going to be part

of our national approach to ai. we have homework assignments. we finished up a big report on ai accountability and auditing. where in the process of doing a big study on open model weights and the question about openness on the most important foundational models, dual use foundational models. there's a lot of work to do. again our domestic policy and our international policy need to be married up, need to be consistent with each other and need to reinforce each other. that's part of the power of this strategy and the importance. again math does not stop at the border. any approaches we take domestically to allow the policy issues, say about ai openness, need to be done in concert with other countries if they're going to be effective. so again, all to the need for having a strategic approach and

making sure that our approach to these domestic issues and dark industrial policy approach makes sense in anna international context. >> do we have the internationalm mechanisms to meet the ai moment, in your opinion, as of right now? and how much of your time, this is the think you're getting the most amount from international partners or is it part of a broad array of things that you getting signal demand from partners? >> so clearly we are not using our existing fora in the ways that there is demand for. a a hallmark i think of this administration point of view has been a resistance to creating a lot of new things. d20, what if you want to call, said to make sure that the existing institutions which with all invested a lot of time and

energy, over the years, that they are fit for purpose as new technologies continue to come onto the scene. use major additional initiatives, energy and g7, inside quandt, inside aukus. secretary blinken calls it fit for purpose and variable geometry. i think that's how we're thinking about it, rather than seeking to create the single pane of glass for this tack or that attack, which ultimately probably takes us down the road we wouldn't want to run down indefinitely. >> probably more diplomatic term, shorthand we've experienced at atlantic council. to pick up on one thing the director brought up, a big part of the strategy we haven't talked through yet is something that is uniquely state which is for an assistant. there is a lot words or ink

spilled on for assistance specifically throughout the strategy, and it also includes importantly, well, recently not directly in the strategy, but congress has approved $50 million for states foreign cyber fund in next years budget. how much does for an assistant point into the strategy? i guess is $50 million in cyber assistance enough for the threat landscape that we face? >> i look at the 50 million as a pilot, frankly, and when i was running a business i used to tell our sales team don't celebrate to the winds. you only get to celebrate the renewals. it's only when somebody actually knows you a no and the jews do more but that you've earned right to celebrate. we're going tole treat the 50 million as a pilot and it's incumbent upon us to ensure that it generates in the year ahead outsize foreign policy returns for the united states so that

when the appropriators reconvene and are deciding what to do next year, it doesn't get increased or decreased by 10% or 15%, but they decide it's worth the investment on the scale of a multiple. so foreign assistance in that pain is one of the major principles that it'ss a threat throughout the strategy. we need to ensure that foreign assistance as a part of our technology strategy, that technology as part of our foreign assistance strategy, , d that security is baked throughout the whole thing. so these are pretty self-evident ideas i suspect to most people who are tuned in your but it's never been set and codified that with any form of use approach before. >> i assume the foreign assistance also depends on working across inter-agency for the actual supplementation programs with entities like cisa. >> we been if i'd working closely with needs team to

what's called an agency agreements, and in particular we we've done a commence work with ukraine, ukraine cyber defenders since we signed off on a memorandum of understanding in the summer of 2022, done a lot of work on training, on exercises. we do in particular training on industrial control systems and operational technology where we bring foreign partners to idaho national labs to take an advanced course on that. but that's aa really important part of how we are working with our foreign partners to help improve the security and resilience of the infrastructure and the capacity of their cyber defense teams. been one of the t impactful partnerships for the ukrainians, but also for us, because even as we have been working together we have been learning from them because they are actively learning how to defend their cyber infrastructure and their

critical infrastructure under both cyberattack as well as barbaric kinetic attacks. it really is something where we are looking to take lessons from what they are doing even as we help them build their own capacity and capability. graham: turning to audience questions, we have gathered a couple, and if you have any questions, go to askac.org and it will show you how to. we have one question from bloomberg. how do you see digital solidarity manifesting itself? is it via treaties, trade agreements, joint infrastructure? what is the first building block or example in how the love strategy is going to be implemented today, o dish on how the strategy is going to be implemented today, or tomorrow, i suppose? alan: things like treaties and trade agreements tend to come later in a relationship.

those are late stage elements. joint infrastructure can be a middle-stage develop it. in early stages it can actually be as simple as words and public positions, beginning to get comfortable with working together on these issues and standing together on these issues. i will give you a quick, concrete example that has unfolded the last 18 months in costa rica, with the costa rican government was the victim of a significant attack that shut down significant portions of their critical infrastructure. the costa rican government came to the u.s. for help. we waited in hard and fast with $25 million in cyber assistance to costa rica in order to reconstitute their capability and improve their cyber hygiene across the board. that cyber response was like the first bounce of the ball. there up a couple more. the second bounce of the ball was the costa rican government

standing up and deciding they were going to exclude un-trusted vendors from the telecom ecosystem. that was challenged and went all the way to the costa rican supreme court, where the government's decision was upheld by the supreme court. the costa rican government held a regional conference on 5g that had more than dozen partners -- not partners, other countries in the region show up to learn more and begin exploring their own, the beginning of their own journey to the commitment of trusted infrastructure. that was the second bounce of the ball. there is a third bounce unfolding, which is given the costa rican government's commitment to cybersecurity and infrastructure, uc global technology, and is including intel but not only interested in increasing their investment in costa rica as part of the realignment of supply chains locally. you can see the early green

shoots of solidarity here and you can imagine the different forms it could take over time. alan: i would add that this is a great example of the interagency cooperation having a real impact on our global approach. we have been really thrilled to work with state department now clanks at the white house and across government on the -- and our colleagues at the white house and across government. another couple of that is what is happening around open technologies around 5g, where we see we have a 5g market that -- 5g is a very exciting technology, the market for 5g's quite static and highly concentrated, very small number of vendors around the world. we've been working for several years to promote a different approach where we have a much more open stack of 5g equipment, creating much more resilient

supply chains for 5g, allowing more trusted networks, broader participation. it's been a journey, but it's one we have been working on altogether interagency. at the commerce department we are administering a wireless innovation fund to promote technologies. the arc -- we have changed the arc of adoption i'm gone from a place where it seemed like it might be -- that people are skeptical of this technology, to a place where we now have partners who are starting by adopting the ideas in the principles behind it and starting to actually deploy networks. i think we are going to see in a very short period of time much more adoption of the technology and that will make us more secure. jen: mentioned the attack on costa rica from ransomware. ransomware is another problem we are dealing with not only in the u.s., but all over the world. being able to work with

governments who have visibility and insight into various threat actors, either because they have been attacked or they have responded or they have waited to help other partners, is incredibly important, again, to have that visibility, to understand that threat so we can drive down risk to the total ecosystem so when something like that happens, cisa will go to assist, working with law enforcement colleagues and folks on the ground so that we can then produce an advisory which provides indicators of compromised information that the technical people can use to then mitigate the threat of those attacks on their infrastructure. it's goodness altogether to have this solidarity from a cyber- specific perspective that is underpinned by a strong infrastructure that is, frankly, put in place for the past 10 years or so.

real-time information sharing and cyber defense collaboration, getting to build on that with was like the assistance fund, are really important. graham: one point from the atlantic council, our cyber statecraft initiatives is going to have its first competition in costa rica this year, which is a workhorse competition for students designed up towards building a more capable workforce not just in the united states, but among partners. one other question from the audience is is the strategy about forming a "coalition of the willing to unite democratic countries against authoritarian countries like china. that is from breaking defense. i'll make that a jump ball. whoever wants to jump on that first. nathaniel: i feel obligated to jump first. [laughter] [applause] but i will jump briefly.

it is intended to offer up an affirmative point of view that others can choose to align themselves with. it's explicitly not oriented around like-minded. it is expressly not oriented around democratic and other. and yes, realistically the united states has a set of adversaries and competitors in the world who adopting a more and more authoritarian set of behaviors in the digital domain, not only on their own, but in collaboration with each other. that is troubling to us, it is coupling to many others. -- it is troubling to many others. this is fundamentally affirmative in its nature. but it enfolds in that context where there is a more authoritarian backdrop to the way the technology ecosystem globally is now starting to unfold. jen: i would -- i was basically

going to say that, but it is all about the context. the strategy talks about the threat environment we are operating in with global cybercrime reaching over $10 t rillion by next year. you have to recognize that. but what makes our nation great and what makes our partnerships strong and robust comes down to our values. everything that makes america what we want it to be as public servants and citizens comes down to our fundamental values, and we recognize that those values are not shared by our adversaries. i do think where the strategy landed with an affirmative, positive vision, is a great reflection of those values and why those values should ultimately triumph. alan: i think we have a strong track record of success to show

the world, the incredible success of the internet as a powerful tool, the new technologies that are developing. there are real challenges that are out there, and that is why it is so important that the strategy addresses how we have an affirmative vision to address and deal with those challenges. i think at the end of the day the most important thing we can do is put out there a positive vision of what the internet and new technologies can be, grounded in our values, and let the world decide. we expect it's a positive vision people will feel good about. graham: to wrap up the conversation, and looking forward, how -- for ambassador fick, how do you measure the impact of the strategy? and how do you want the bureau to position itself going forward into not just this

administration, but the next administration and the next administration after that? and for both of you, how would you want your successor to be interacting with the strategy going forward? nathaniel: so, quickly, i think one of the things that i suspect we all are grateful for is that the national cybersecurity strategy has had a robust implementation plan. like hitting a baseball, you publish the strategy is connecting with the ball, but to put it over the fence, you have got to follow through, and all the follow-through happens after publication day. we have an implementation framework that is going to guide the work we do. one realistic a caveat, of course, is international strategy, you generally control the actors. in international strategy you don't. it is less deterministic than a national strategy can be. but i think we will see it unfold across all of these lines

of effort that are laid out in the strategy. they are all pretty well integrated. we will continue engaging hard in multilateral fora on these issues, we will continue to try to beef up our foreign assistance on technology issues, we will continue building capacity not only in the world, but inside our own institutions, making sure we have tech-capable diplomats at every u.s. vision and the wealth, that are ambassadors and chiefs of mission are increasingly selected with technology integrated as one of the criteria by which they are evaluated, and on and on. alan: i will just say hopefully our successors are still a long time in coming. you can looked a it as a long arch to our internet policies, cyberspace issues. started back with the original magaziner report in the late

1990's, internet principles of the early 2010, it's the articulation of a positive vision for how we are going to approach the internet and new technology. and i think it's in the spirit of making sure we're putting out, as i said, a positive vision. anybody who is coming in to these roles in the future will be part of that long arc of making sure we're building technology that works for people and is consistent with our values and is a work in progress and this is very much in the spirit of that, this arc of history. jen: totally agree and plus one on the national security strategy which has been deliberately implemented. we'll certainly be releasing our own cyberinternational strategy, cisa, that comes with assisted measures of effectiveness.

we tried to drive it over the past several years to be a much more data driven agency because at the end of the day, our job is to lead the national effort to understand, manage, and reduce to the cyberand physical infrastructure that americans rely on every day. and what really matters is our ability to reduce that risk in a measurable way. so what i hope my successor can see a world of global cyberspace five years from now where ransom wear is a shocking anomaly and the only way we can get there is through robust, globally driven public-private operational collaboration and a technology ecosystem that is built, texted, delivered, and deployed to be delivered and has to be an international endeavor and hopefully is what we'll all see in the coming years as a result of the great work of my teammates and our teams.

>> we will invite you all back and check in on how it's all going here in a little while. director, administrator davidson and ambassador, thank you so much interest in time with us today. thank you for your work on the strategy and thank you all for spinning timeus with us this afternoon. we will see on line for the next conversation we check inth on te strategy. thanks. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> today on c-span, the house returned at noon eastern for general speeches followed by legislative business at 2:00. members will consider the final version of a five-year faa reauthorization bill under suspension of the rules a must past deadline this friday. the senate approved the bill last week by vote of 88-4 and require a two-thirds majority to pass in the house. at 90 and one c-span2, the u.s. chamber of commerce is hosting an infrastructure conference with biden administration officials and state and local

leaders. at three the senate returns to consider the nomination for u.s. permanent representative to the united nations educational, scientific, and cultural organization. on c-span3 at 4:30 p.m. a hearing to examine the 2025 budget request for the v.a. office of information and technology. you can also watch our live coverage on the c-span now video out or online at c-span.org. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by television companies and more including buckeye broadband. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> buckeye broadband supports c-span is a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front-row

at