Rumor is that the security adviser will report both to the National Security Council, as well as the senior White House economic adviser. And while no one is against network security, there’s a legal and political hot potato here: What role with the adviser have in protecting private-sector networks? The word “protecting” has become politically charged because the real question is what kind of authority the National Security agency will have over “protecting” private email and phone calls.

According to a new Deloitte Touche Tomatsu report, governments around the world need to address cybersecurity immediately to mitigate the threat of disruption to government operations and commerce, and to facilitate sustainable economic growth. The report makes the case that increased interaction among governments and their citizens will result in an increase in global commerce. According to the report, Cybersecurity: Everybody’s Imperative. Protecting our economies, governments, and citizens, everything that depends on cyberspace — from infrastructure to military operations and national security — is at risk.
Yet wariness among privacy advocates is running high, particularly following the Bush administration’s secrecy in handling its Comprehensive National Cyber Security Initiative, most of which was classified. Washington leaks indicate the White House’s role will be to oversee the process, set policy and coordinate agencies’ roles rather than get involved in operations. Yet Senior White House Economic Adviser Lawrence Summers wants to make sure the National Economic Council has a key role in cybersecurity to make sure that efforts to protect private networks don’t threaten economic growth.

The cyber czar is just one of the Obama administration positions that could affect the telecom industry and the economy, and this week’s appointment may help to ease concerns.

Drawing the most fire, former FCC economist Michael Katz bashed rural life to the extent that it got the attention of NPR’s well-modulated Morning Edition. And New York Times blogger Saul Hansel weighed in with his opinions on various economists’ views.

With its Broadband Connection Highs and Lows Across Rural America, The Daily Yonder website is keeping it rural, and offered what appears to be the most knowledgeable analysis of broadband in exurban areas, complete with a map of which counties have the highest broadband concentration. We’ll have plenty of time to point fingers on this one, but even I couldn’t help but comment given my rural background. Any type of country-wide infrastructure buildout has had some kind of government help, and in my view, this is the next universal service.

President Barack Obama promised a bipartisan effort, and in terms of his cyber-security strategy, so far the plan looks remarkably like the 2008 plan recommended by a bipartisan group of computer security experts. The focus is to protect U.S. networks from cyber attack and to increase investment and research on cyber security.

You know that means network regulation to combat cyber crime and increase computer network security, among other things. The new Administration wants to partner with industry to secure personal data stored on government and private systems, with a standard that secures data across industries.

The new Administration’s cyber-security plan hit the Whitehouse.gov website as part of a policy document on homeland security. It’s reassuring to know that the first Blackberry-carrying president believes cyber infrastructure is a strategic asset and may create a national cyber advisor who will report directly to him (hopefully in person, since cyber-impersonation is easier than anyone wants to think, according to security expert Bruce Schneier in his Crypto-Gram newsletter).

What else? The Administration wants to work with industry and academia to develop and deploy a new generation of secure hardware and software, work with the private sector to establish tough standards for cyber security and physical resilience, and a number of additional business and personal security.

Telecom industry lobbyists are no doubt loading their briefcases to make the case for what they want, as well as what they can live with. Stay tuned.

The rumored new head of the FCC is an FOB. That’s “Friend of Barack,” people, as in a former Harvard Law School classmate of the president-elect, who definitely knows his way around Washington D.C. (Yes, he’s on Facebook, but has he friended you?)

The nomination of technology exec Julius Genachowski is still an official secret, which is obvious because it’s been blasted all over every website and publication that has any interest in communications policy. The Genachowski nomination will be no big surprise, as he is already Obama’s chief technology advisor already.

Genachowski already knows the FCC drill, as he was chief counsel for Reed Hundt, the FCC chairman under former President Bill Clinton, and has worked at IAC/InterActiveCorp and other technology companies. He also co-founded LaunchBox Digital, a venture capital firm in Washington, D.C.

What policies does Genachowski favor? We’re hearingnet neutrality (government mandated?, cheap broadband for everybody, and media ownership rules that favor diversity.

Even before Obama’s inauguration, telecommunications policy and regulation has been in the spotlight, as the new Commissions will need to immediately deal with the conversion to digital television and the Obama universal broadband strategy.

The FCC is supposed to ensure that the digital television conversion on Feb. 17 goes smoothly (only an estimated 20 million people to switch and the government fund that provides conversion box coupons running out of money). The Obama transition team made it clear that the president-elect would like to push the conversion deadline back to the summer, citing readiness and funding concerns.

In the longer term, building out broadband is part of Obama’s economic stimulus package. The new FCC chairman will hear every possible viewpoint on how to accomplish a broadband buildout and arguments who should be allowed to get tax credits or other incentives to do so. Navigating that free-for-all alone will show us what Genachowski is made of. Stay tuned.

I live in the policy belt where there’s no rust in sight and the river of policy statements flows with honey. There’s never a recession in the policy-wonk biz, so with that setting, let’s talk about President-elect Obama’s broadband stimulus package.

As the new administration works with Congress to get a potential $1 trillion economic stimulus package in place, telecom and cable lobbyists will be pressing the flesh over talk of broadband expansion as one-part U.S. economic revival and one-part show the world the U.S. isn’t a has-been in a global economy.

What’s good news for telecom is that unlike the automotive industry, product demand is growing. Obama has been clear that he wants to make sure broadband access is universal so inner cities and rural areas are served as well. Harsh but true, most telecom providers offer broadband in the most lucrative locations. And why wouldn’t they? Again, unlike the automotive industry, they have to pay for their own network infrastructure, so to build every where, even if they lose money doing it, they’re going to need incentives.

A broadband stimulus package that would extend network coverage or increase speeds in existing areas may be in the $20-to-$30 billion range, if reports are true. It sounds like infrastructure-building tax credits are on the table, anywhere from 60% for new builds and 40% for speed increases.

Already, the scramble for who can benefit from potential tax credits has begun. There are always public interest groups that cry foul about giving an advantage to companies that already have and know how to build and run networks. Weighing in already are organizations including Public Knowledge and Free Press. That’s their job.

The behind the scenes rumor-mill says that for the ObamaAdministration, this isn’t about increasing competition. Bravo. I’ll take network expertise any time. Verizon, AT&T, Cox Communications and Comcast — to name only four in what appears to be a working cable/telecom broadband duopoly — know how to build broadband networks. So let them do it, with tax credits if it gets it done faster.

I don’t want to sound like Father Time or anything, but, did we not learn a lesson in the 1990s when anyone with a backhoe decided to build a high-speed, fiber-optic network? Lest history repeat itself so soon, let’s remember who went bankrupt and who ended up picking up those new fiber optic networks for a song. Building, maintaining and running a broadband network isn’t a no-brainer, so I’m all for keeping the hyperbole down and getting the job done.

U.S. telecom and cable companies are already struggling to figure out how to monetize their networks, and they’re still cutting jobs. Maybe this demand-driven industry can even create jobs.

The bottom line is, broadband in the U.S. needs to grow, and if the plan gets bogged down in bickering about who should be allowed to get a tax break in this often razor-thin profit business, I swear I’ll be blogging on the Capitol steps in protest, and I hope I see you there.