This will have to be done in short order, since the digital revolution's pace will soon outstrip our ability to deal with it
Many have commented on this bit, but nobody has said what really matters about it: it's fundamentally wrong. The exponential changes brought on by the growth of technology are not a "forthcoming reality" or of "unprecedented scale and pace", but something that's been occurring for decades. Whether it's smartphones or Y2K before that or the Internet before that or PCs before that, the NSA only embarrasses itself when it tries to assert that any of this is new or that we ought to be in a rush to do something special about it now.
Finally, and perhaps most ominously, the digital revolution has the potential for a pernicious effect on the very legitimacy and thus stability of our governmental and societal structures.
This nobody has commented on, but I find the most interesting admission. When the agency tasked with securing your nation says, "Hey, you know what, we've entered an era of science and technology that can demonstrate we have an illegitimate government", that's pretty significant. Instability should be taken as a given in that kind of world, and you have to wonder what the role of the NSA (and other agencies) should be when it comes to embracing evolution as a hedge against revolution. Similar lessons are in the current China/Hong Kong divide.
I am left to wonder what the purpose of the essay is. Is the NSA trying to lay the groundwork for some policy initiative ? Some legislation? A budget request?
Money is always a prime motivator. If there's a policy change, it might be to increase the scope of what the mission of "security" is at the federal level. But the rhetoric of urgency makes me think it will come with a lot of waste rather than wise spending.
d981639c1e26b0208308dd6e55ec45b6750bce6d90aefe5afe7b9e4f668690a6