Final Minutes of the
President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee
February 7, 2001
|
The twelfth meeting of the President’s Information Technology
Advisory Committee was called to order by Co-Chairs Raj Reddy and
Irving Wladawsky-Berger at 3:10 p.m., February 7, 2001, in Room 1235
of the National Science Foundation (NSF) building, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,
Arlington, Virginia. Seventeen Committee members, 32 Federal employees,
and 25 private citizens attended the two-day PITAC meeting.
I. Wladawsky-Berger commented that there were positive indications
that the PITAC’s term would be extended by the new Administration.
R. Reddy noted that three PITAC Panel reports would be ready to forward
to the President if the Committee approved the final drafts during
the meeting.
Briefing on cyber infrastructure
Ruzena Bajcsy, Assistant Director, Directorate of Computer and
Information Science and Engineering, National Science Foundation (NSF), discussed her vision for a prototype "cyber infrastructure"
for scientific research that would offer terascale capabilities for
computation, networking, mass storage, and distributed data-generating
instrumentation, or "T-four." Such a high-end infrastructure
is greatly needed, Bajcsy said, because of the increasingly central
role played by information technologies in research across all the
sciences and the growing demand for advanced computing and networking
infrastructure in every field, including education and human services.
Creating such an infrastructure is not really the job of the individual
disciplines; it is the responsibility of computer science and engineering.
Bajcsy said NSF’s terascale computing initiative incorporates
the "T-four" concept and thus offers a funding model and
some components that could be part of such a prototype.
PITAC members discussed how broadband connectivity would be provided,
and they suggested that the overall cost of such an infrastructure
would be high. Bajcsy responded that she welcomed feedback from PITAC
members about how to proceed and said she hoped to build support for
the plan over time. A PITAC member complimented her on her work at
NSF to advocate funding for infrastructure as a necessary underpinning
of agency-supported research.
Briefing on individual security
Joe F. Thompson, chair of the new PITAC Panel on Individual Security,
introduced Joan Z. Bernstein, Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection
at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and her colleague Joanna Crane.
Bernstein discussed identity theft — the use of another
person’s personal identifying information to commit fraud or
other crimes. The FTC became involved in the issue because the FTC
enforces the Truth in Lending Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act,
which governs the conduct of consumer credit-reporting agencies. A
1996 FTC conference to explore the civil and criminal law-enforcement
implications of identity theft led in1998 to enactment of the Identity
Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act, which made identity theft a Federal
crime and gave the FTC lead coordination responsibility (excluding
criminal enforcement) in this area. FTC initiatives include consumer
education, a data clearinghouse, a complaint Web site, and a hotline
(877-IDTHEFT), which now receives some 2,000 calls per week. The FTC
is also working on ways to better protect individuals’ Social
Security number — the most widely used personal identifier.
Joanna Crane discussed data collected by the FTC that are shared
with law-enforcement agencies and analyzed to show trends. The FTC
has logged more than 42,000 database records in the data-collection
project’s first 14 months; two thirds represent victims of identity
theft; 23 percent of all calls to FTC help lines concern identity
theft. The Internet is less often cited as the possible source of
identity information than FTC expected, Crane said; most common is
loss or theft of a wallet.
In response to a question about the low level of Internet involvement,
Crane emphasized that 80 percent of victims reporting to the FTC do
not know how their information was stolen. Bernstein added that an
increasing number of FTC fraud cases over all involve use of the Internet.
PITAC members discussed other aspects of identity theft trends and
the need for greater awareness of the problem.
R. Reddy introduced John Ryan, vice president and associate general
counsel of America Online, Inc.
Ryan discussed identity theft from the perspective of a major
online service provider. He noted that the 1998 law specifically recognizes
unique online identifiers, such as passwords, ID numbers, and IP addresses,
as covered. He cited AOL policies designed to educate its members
and protect them from fraud, and said the company also has a 24/7
office that responds to inquiries from legal authorities about possible
illegal online activity. However, because AOL customer IP addresses
are dynamically issued each time a customer logs on, and address records
are kept for only 90 days, tracking such activity is difficult. AOL
maintains only member names, addresses, and phone numbers on an ongoing
basis. Key challenges in identify theft are lack of knowledge among
local law enforcement personnel and jurisdictional issues in cases
with national and international ramifications.
PITAC members asked about the legal liability of a person whose stolen
identity is used for illegal activity. Ryan said there is no criminal
liability, absent intent, but possibly civil liability through failure
to take reasonable safeguard measures. He reiterated that stealing
ID information may be larceny, but it is not identity theft under
the 1998 law unless the information is used for illegal activity.
Report of the Panel on Individual Security
Panel Chair J. Thompson reported on the group’s initial steps,
including its first meeting held earlier in the day. The chair attended
four recent Federal conferences on identity theft. Information technology
is very much involved in this problem: There is now a disconnect between
identity of an actual person and identity as an abstraction in databases
that can be bought and sold. Information technology amplifies the
effect of ID theft — for example, enabling a person with someone
else’s Social Security number to obtain a credit card and make
purchases on the Internet before the fraud is discovered. Thompson
detailed other ways that information technology-aided processes provide
growing opportunities for criminal activity based on ID theft. The
always-connected feature of broadband access will only increase risks
to individual security; providers will have to set up security measures.
The Panel also plans to examine two related issues — individual
privacy and secure communication — and will hold briefings
and a workshop during its study. The Panel hopes to complete its work
by the September 2001 PITAC meeting.
PITAC members discussed technical and ethical difficulties in maintaining
both security and privacy.
Report of the Panel on Digital Libraries
Panel Chair David C. Nagel summarized the findings and recommendations
of the Panel’s report. The final draft for PITAC approval will
be distributed at the February 8 session of the PITAC meeting.
PITAC members discussed the Federal leadership role in implementing
the Panel’s recommendations.
Public comments
There were no public comments.
Adjournment of session
Co-Chair R. Reddy adjourned the session, noting that the PITAC would
reconvene at 8 a.m. February 8.
The full transcript of the PITAC meeting is available at the National
Coordination Office for Information Technology Research and Development,
4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite II-405, Arlington, Virginia 22230. Tel.:
(703) 292-4873. E-mail: nco@nitrd.gov
Final Minutes of the
President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee
February 8, 2001
The twelfth meeting of the President’s Information Technology
Advisory Committee reconvened and was called to order by Co-Chairs
Raj Reddy and Irving Wladawsky-Berger at 8:10 a.m., February 8, 2001,
in Room 1235 of the National Science Foundation (NSF) building, 4201
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia.
R. Reddy commended Yolanda Comedy, who has resigned as PITAC liaison,
for her many contributions to the operations of the Committee over
the last three years and presented her with a letter of commendation
on behalf of the members.
Comments by Office of Science and Technology Policy representative
Paul Domich, OSTP, reported that the Administration had not
yet selected a Science Advisor to the President. As a result, White
House policy guidance is not yet available for PITAC. Domich noted
that renewal of the Executive Order authorizing the PITAC had received
strong bipartisan support from Congress members and trade associations,
which he called a statement about the quality of PITAC’s work
and leadership.
Report of the Digital Divide Panel
Ching-chih Chen, co-chair of the Panel with John P. Miller, discussed
the recommendations to PITAC resulting from the June 2000 workshop
for smaller colleges and universities co-sponsored by the Panel and
Educause with support from NSF. The recommendations, which focus on
steps to improve advanced networking capabilities for the 94 percent
of higher education institutions that currently do not have access
to high-speed networks, are contained in the Educause report "Avoiding
the Digital Divide for Smaller Institutions of Higher Education."
PITAC members discussed ways the Committee might respond to the recommendations.
Report of the Panel on Transforming Learning
Panel member Eric A. Benhamou presented the Panel’s report in
the absence of the co-chairs. He noted that the Panel’s findings
and recommendations align well with many elements of the President’s
new K-12 education initiative. He highlighted the Panel’s decision
to look at the whole continuum of education and training, on the grounds
that leveraging IT capabilities will be beneficial across the board,
even though settings and content will differ. This perspective also
informed the Panel’s overarching recommendation that integration
of information technology in education and training be made a national
priority. Benhamou described the Panel’s second recommendation
as its boldest and potentially most influential: The Government should
establish focused government/industry/foundation partnerships to aggressively
pursue the IT research program it will take to develop advanced education
and training applications.
In response to questions, Benhamou discussed the Panel’s thinking
on the funding structure for the proposed research partnerships. PITAC
members also discussed the roles of states and local systems in education
decision-making and the importance of cognition-based research on
IT applications in learning. I. Wladawsky-Berger asked members to
relay specific editorial comments to the Panel in writing for incorporation
in the final report draft.
Report of the Panel on Transforming Health Care
Edward H. Shortliffe, Panel co-chair with Sherrilyne S. Fuller, discussed
the Panel’s draft report on transforming health care. After fine-tuning
the report in recent months, the Panel now views its findings and
recommendations as final, rather than an interim version. Key findings
are that there is no accepted national vision on the role of IT in
health care; there is not yet a critical mass of researchers and practitioners
working at the crossroads of biomedicine and computing; and the biomedical
community, including Federal agencies, continues to rely on IT capabilities
produced by other technical areas. The Panel recommends: pilot projects
and Enabling Technology centers to extend the uses of IT in clinical
and research settings; establishing a scalable national computing
infrastructure for research; legislation assuring sound management
of personal health information; programs to increase the number of
health professionals skilled in IT; and that the Department of Health
and Human Services (DHHS) lead development of an IT vision for health
care and the research necessary to realize it, in part through appointment
of a senior IT leader in DHHS.
PITAC members commented on the difficulties of infusing IT in the
biomedical research culture and of establishing partnerships between
the National Institutes of Health and NSF that could encourage change.
Members suggested a few wording changes in the report.
Report of the Panel on International Issues
C. Chen, co-chair with Vinton Cerf, discussed the activities of the
Panel to date. Because the scope of international IT issues is so
vast, the Panel had focused on issues in infrastructure for education
and training and was planning to hold workshops. But in recent discussions
with the PITAC co-chairs, it was decided to put a hold on activities
to see what guidance on priorities emerges from the new Administration.
Report of the Panel on Wireless Technology
Panel Chair Steven D. Dorfman described the shift in his thinking
from skeptical to positive about what a PITAC panel on wireless issues
could contribute. There are so many rapidly emerging issues about
wireless technology that a PITAC report defining what research requirements
are not being fulfilled in the current environment would be useful.
Larry Smarr commented that industry is very active in this area, but
because the field is so new the work lacks the traditional underpinnings
of prior university and government research and documentation. At
the same time, over the next few years the pressures on the Internet
from billions of wireless devices with embedded processors will demand
vast new computer science research on middleware. A major issue is
the security vulnerabilities of wireless.
Discussion of proposed update of PITAC 1999 report
PITAC members discussed Federal IT R&D program activities since
1999 from the perspective of the four research priorities recommended
in the PITAC report and the PITAC committees that developed the sections
on priorities.
Software — James N. Gray reported on the ways the report’s
recommended focus on development methods, computer interface, information
management, and advanced applications has been picked up by the IT
R&D agencies in new research. The PITAC recommendations have held
up well as guidelines. An updated software committee report can be
completed by September 2001.
Scalable information infrastructure — Leslie Vadasz reported
that agencies have pursued the PITAC agenda, from large-scale systems
to the fundamental physics of advanced networking. It is troubling
that the funding in these areas in FY 2001 is only three-quarters
of what PITAC recommended. On the other hand, the available funding
appears to be managed along the lines of the report’s recommendations.
Key areas for the committee to look into are network security research
and legal issues affecting a borderless technology in a world of borders.
Members discussed other new developments such as peer-to-peer computing,
and network scalability demands far beyond what was imagined in 1999.
High-end computing — Steven J. Wallach reported that agency
funding has substantially increased for innovative computing technologies
and architectures, software to improve high-end performance, and acquisition
of a high-end system for science research. PITAC’s other priority
— drive research toward sustained petaflops-level performance
— requires integration of all capabilities, but the growth of
distributed computing has changed the framework for integration. Wallach
said his view is that a research initiative to build a prototype terascale
distributed system is needed.
An extensive discussion ensued as to the status of research in high-performance
architectures, the possible designs of future high-end systems, and
the degree to which developments and emerging issues since the 1999
report call for new comment by the PITAC.
Social, economic, and workforce issues — J. Miller reported
that the IT R&D program agencies responded to the 1999 report
by expanding the research agenda and changing the name of the relevant
Program Component Area (PCA) to Social, Economic, and Workforce Implications
of IT and IT Workforce Development (SEW), now part of the formal IT
R&D budget crosscut. Miller complimented NSF program director
Suzanne Iacono for her leadership as chair of the SEW Coordinating
Group.
PITAC members discussed whether such SEW topics as intellectual property
and privacy should be revisited. E. Benhamou said he was concerned
that PITAC’s work stay within the Committee’s technical
charter and not expand into policy issues.
Report of the Panel on National Security
Robert E. Kahn, Panel co-chair with Ken Kennedy, discussed the preliminary
steps of the new Panel. The Panel has held several briefings with
Federal officials and plans ongoing interactions with government and
private sector representatives. It is looking beyond current information
assurance activities to examine long-term IT research issues and opportunities,
and will view national security in a national, not just a military,
context. The Panel hopes to develop realistic scenarios of potential
major security failures, including their international ramifications,
and to propose methods and systems for both proactive and defensive
protections.
Presentation on report of U.S. Commission on National Security/21st
Century
General Charles Boyd, U.S. Air Force, retired, and Executive
Director of the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century,
discussed the three reports of the 14-member nonpartisan commission
chaired by former Senators Gary Hart and Warren B. Rudman. The charge
to the commission, established in 1998, was to characterize the world
of the 21st century, propose a U.S. national security strategy for
that world, and evaluate the ability of current national security
architectures to respond to 21st century threats. Key findings were
that migration of people is a leading world issue in the new century,
and resentment against the U.S. will be a top national security issue.
The commission concluded that security for the U.S. "homeland"
should be the highest priority, reflected in establishment of an agency
focused on security within U.S. borders. The commission’s reports
are available at http://www.nssg.gov/.
PITAC members discussed education and IT workforce issues related
to the commission’s findings. I. Wladasky-Berger opened the discussion
for public comment.
An unidentified participant described the career path of a young man
from India who received his Ph.D. in computer science at the University
of Maryland. This person went to work for Adobe but was bored with
his job. Because he was so capable, his boss asked what it would take
to keep him. The young man said he would like to start a software
development center in India. So Adobe sent him to India, where he
founded Adobe Media Ltd., today a million-dollar business. So it is
not just a case of the U.S. losing people, the speaker said; it is
a different kind of world today.
Sue Fratkin of the Coalition for Academic Scientific Computation commented,
in response to General Boyd’s remarks on the complexity of Congressional
oversight processes, that she had found in a recent study she did
that 43 Congressional committees have oversight over telecommunications
and technology issues.
Public comments
There were no public comments.
Adjournment
R. Reddy and I. Wladawsky-Berger adjourned the meeting at 12:45 p.m.
The full transcript of the PITAC meeting is available at the National
Coordination Office for Information Technology Research and Development,
4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite II-405, Arlington, Virginia 22230. Tel.:
(703) 292-4873. E-mail: nco@nitrd.gov
|
|
Attendees
February 8-9, 2001
|
PITAC Members Attending
|
Raj Reddy, Co-Chair
Irving Wladawsky-Berger, Co-Chair
Eric A. Benhamou
Ching-chih Chen
Steven D. Dorfman
Sherrilynne S. Fuller
James N. Gray
W. Daniel Hillis
Robert E. Kahn
Ken Kennedy
John P. Miller
David C. Nagel
Edward H. Shortliffe
Larry Smarr
Joe F. Thompson
Leslie Vadasz
Steven J. Wallach |
Carnegie-Mellon University
International Business Machines
Corporation
3Com Corporation
Simmons College
Hughes Electronics Corporation
University of Washington Health
Science center
Microsoft Research
Applied Minds, Inc.
Corporation for National Research
Initiatives
center for Research on Parallel
Computation, Rice University
Montana State University
AT&T Labs
College of Physicians and Surgeons,
Columbia University
California Institute for Telecommunications
and Information Technology
Mississippi State University
Intel Corporation
centerPoint Ventures
|
Government Attendees
Kamal Abdali, NSF
David Bernholz, NCO/ITRD
Joanna Crane, FTC
Lawrence Daly, DOC
Frederica Darema, NSF
Paul Domich, OSTP
W.R. Franklin, NSF
Tom Gallitano, NSF
Helen Gigley, NCO/ITRD
Helen Gill, NSF/DARPA
Norman Glick, NSA
Dan Hitchcock, DOE
Charles Holland, OSD
Sally Howe, NCO/ITRD
Suzanne Iacono, NSF
Carey M. Johnson, DOE
Gary Koob, DARPA
A.B. Maddox, NSF
Steve Mahaney, NSF
Lynette Millett, NRC
José Muñoz, DOE
Kimberly Nelson, U.S. Senate
C.E. Oliver, DOE
Walter M. Polansky, DOE
Jack Schofield, NAVAIR
Lori Shapiro, OSTP
Robert Sloan, NSF
Carl Smith, NSF
Gary Strong, NSF
Susan Turnbull, GSA
William Turnbull, NOAA
Grant Wagner, NSA
NCO Contractors
Yolanda L. Comedy
Ed Garcia
Vicki L. Harris
Larry Janicki
Martha Matzke
Virginia Moore
Betty S. McDonough
Grant Miller
Ann Rutherford
Frank Sledge
Alan Tellington
Carolyn Van Damme
Diane Vellines
Robert I. Winner
Private Citizens
Vince Adams II, MDB Inc.
Fred Adler, RCI, Ltd.
Dan van Belleghem, NCSA
C. Boyd, NSSG
Diane Frank, Federal Computer Week
Sue Fratkin, Coalition for Academic Scientific Computation
Kevin Gamble, ADEC
Dean G. Georopoulos, Kosmos
Michael Herve, Embassy of France
Gill Hope, hopeandcare Int.
Laveen Kamal, UMD/LNK
Mark Luker, EDUCAUSE
Neil Martonora, Federal Technology Report
Matt Mathis, PSC
Laurant de Mercey, Embassy of France
James Moore, Mitre
Scott Nance, New Technology Week
Janet Paley, ADEC
Paul Byron Pattak, NSSG
Randy Ross, ADEC
Maureen Suhn, Technology Daily
Dreama Tave, 3Com
Ron Teixeira, IA
Dan Verton, Computerworld
Carmen Whitson, Strategic Analysis, Inc.
Minutes prepared by Martha K. Matzke. |
|
May 8, 2001
|
Cita Furlani
Director, National Coordination Office for Information Technology
Research and Development
|
Approved:
|
|
May 8, 2001
|
Raj Reddy
Co-Chair, President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee
|
|
May 8, 2001
|
Irving Wladawawsky-Berger
Co-Chair, President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee
|
|
|
