Hi Tony - that's a good question - two actually.
I've copied Jamie. He may have a better feel for the interplay between the effects of the act and the ISAO. Since the DHS is continuing to fund the operation of the ISAO, I'm guessing it doesn't see it as superseded.
As to substantive, I am no expert. That's why I thought the best course of action was to share it with all of you. To me, on skimming, these look more like statements of principles and requirements. But I didn't want to assume that the material isn't relevant.
/chet
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Tony Rutkowski <> wrote:
Chet,
A basic question. Doesn't the Cybersecurity Information
Sharing Act of 2015 as organic law (and in Europe, the NIS
Directive) - both enacted into law in December - effectively
supersede whatever role this ISOA SO contract effort was
expected to play under the old EO? The entity itself
has no jurisdiction or authority. Put another way, isn't
the TC CTI itself fulfilling the principal purposes of the Act?
Do any of these materials have anything substantive
in them on which to comment? Just an inquiring
mind question.
--tony
On 2016-05-05 5:07 PM, Chet Ensign
wrote:
FYI, in case this was missed (I missed it initially):
--
/chet
----------------
Chet Ensign
Director of Standards Development and TC Administration
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org
Primary: +1 973-996-2298
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393
