Future of Lone Wolf terrorism; future of intelligence oversight; cyber incoherence, and more

Terrorism and the future Lone Wolf threat in America (Carol Rollie Flynn, Cipher Brief)
There is one truth in terrorism that intelligence officials and national security experts have seen proven over the past few years: terrorist tactics are continuously evolving.

Cyber incoherence (Paul Rosenzweig, Lawfare)
Last week, Megan Reiss and I mocked the silliness of the national security adviser John Bolton’s idea to eliminate the cyber coordinator role. Proving that Lawfare has little influence and that the White House has little coherence, on Tuesday the NSC announced a reorganization that killed the coordinator position. The White House says the cyber team has two senior directors, and a coordinator is not needed. It also argues that eliminating a layer of bureacracy would make things move more smoothly, as if coordination was achieved by eliminating a coordinator. This is not just nonsense: It is nonsense on stilts.

White House cuts cyber coordinator role but lawmakers say not so fast (Joseph Marks, Defense One)
House Democrats charged National Security Adviser John Bolton’s move lowers the White House’s cyber expertise as threats are increasing.

CIA “leaker” Josh Schulte posted agency code online — and CIA never noticed (Kevin Poulsen, Daily Beast)
He’s been fingered as the man who gave away some of the CIA’s most important secrets. And for years, he was practically hiding in plain sight.

Department of Energy strategy aims to make power systems more resilient to hacking (Sean Lyngaas, Cyberscoop)
Citing an increase in criminal and nation-state hackers targeting the energy sector, the Department of Energy has released a five-year strategy to cut down on the risk of power-supply disruptions resulting from cyber incidents.

The U.S. Air Force is adding algorithms to predict when planes will break (Marcus Weisberger, Defense One)
The airlines already use predictive maintenance technology. Now the service’s materiel chief says it’s a “must-do for us.”

Are Facebook’s ads controlling us? A new version of an old question. (Mike Goodwin, Lawfare)
In the heat of today’s debate about the ethics—and possibly anti-democratic effects—of targeted advertising on Facebook and on other internet platforms, it’s easy to forget that this debate about advertising is an old one. Do commercial or political advertisers aim to push our psychological buttons in ways we’re unaware of? Does advertising really have the power to compel us to buy products or to choose candidates?

At a crossroads, Part II: No more shadows: The future of intelligence oversight in Congress (Tommy Ross, War on the Rocks)
In the 2012 James Bond film Skyfall, M (Judi Dench) and Gareth Mallory (Ralph Fiennes) debate how to respond to a leak that has led to the assassination of several MI6 intelligence agents. They are torn between a desire to ensure that MI6, Britain’s premier spy agency, remains a credible part of British democratic institutions and the need to avoid antiquation in the face of rapidly changing technology and spycraft. At one point, Mallory laments, “We can’t keep working in the shadows. There are no more shadows!” Mallory and M’s conversation encapsulates the broader, real-life dilemma that the intelligence community and intelligence oversight face in the modern era.