Michael Daniel is the person who is on point for shaping cyber security in the US government. I find it rather disquieting that the White House cyber security coordinator espouses his lack of technical knowledge as a plus.
From Gov Security:
“Being too down in the weeds at the technical level could actually be a little bit of a distraction,” Daniel, a special assistant to the president, says in an interview with Information Security Media Group.
“You can get enamored with the very detailed aspects of some of the technical solutions,” he says. “And, particularly here at the White House … the real issue is to look at the broad, strategic picture and the impact that technology will have.”
The impact it will have? How can you know the impact if you have no clue what it does? Cue the Monty Python “we have the machine that goes ping” line. While I would agree that strategy is a key component here I have a problem with his apparent lack of knowledge on the subject matter for which he is helping to shape policy. This makes as much sense as me shaping medical policy. I know the broad topics such as “death = bad” but, it would be ill advised for me to dictate medical advice regarding cancer therapy.
Why does this seem OK to Daniel? Not having technical expertise on a subject for which he is guiding policy seems fundamentally broken.