	Background

This report describes the ways that international terrorists and insurgents use the Internet, strategically and tactically, in pursuit of their political agendas. Why and How International Terrorists Use the Internet

The Internet is used as a prime recruiting tool for insurgents. There may be some evidence that terrorist organizations seek the ability to use the Internet itself as a weapon in an attack against critical infrastructures. The Internet can also be used to transmit information and material support for planned acts of terrorism. Federal Government Efforts to Address Cyberterrorism

A number of U.S. government organizations appear to monitor terrorist websites and conduct a variety of activities aimed at countering them. Different agencies may weigh each option differently, creating a need to achieve interagency consensus prior to action. Counterpropaganda: Strategic Communications, Public Diplomacy, and Information Operations

In common parlance and in media reporting, the terms "strategic communications," "public diplomacy," "global engagement," "information operations," and "propaganda" are often used interchangeably. There is no overarching definition of strategic communications for the federal government. Although some reports warn of social media's potential misuse by terrorists, government policies are evolving to embrace the use of tools such as Facebook and Twitter as a means of strategic communications and public diplomacy. Yet DOD has been working with DHS and the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center through Cyberstorm and other exercises to map out a National Cyber Incident Response Plan, which gives a structure for how the federal government might respond in the event of a major cyberattack. Laws may be interpreted by some agencies to prohibit certain activities, and in some cases agencies may have competing equities at stake. Institutional Constraints

Some argue that the effectiveness of the U.S. government's strategic communications, information operations, and global engagement programs is still hampered by the U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. § 1461), also known as the Smith-Mundt Act. Some say that these policies have created an unnecessary "firewall" between domestic and foreign audiences, limiting what information the United States produces and distributes to counter extremists in cyberspace for fear of "blow-back" to its own citizens. Intelligence Gain/Loss Calculus

Tensions between a website's purported intelligence value and operational threat level can determine the particular capabilities used to thwart the site. 5729 , the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2010. This bill, which may be reintroduced in some form in the current Congress, has generated much discussion over what some describe as the "Internet Kill Switch."
The Internet is used by international insurgents, jihadists, and terrorist organizations as a tool for radicalization and recruitment, a method of propaganda distribution, a means of communication, and ground for training. Although there are no known reported incidents of cyberattacks on critical infrastructure as acts of terror, this could potentially become a tactic in the future.
There are several methods for countering terrorist and insurgent information operations on the Internet. The federal government has organizations that conduct strategic communications, counterpropaganda, and public diplomacy activities. The National Framework for Strategic Communication guides how interagency components are to integrate their activities. However, these organizations may be stovepiped within agencies, and competing agendas may be at stake. This report does not discuss technical and Internet architecture design solutions.
Some may interpret the law to prevent federal agencies from conducting "propaganda" activities that may potentially reach domestic audiences. Others may wish to dismantle all websites that are seen to have malicious content or to facilitate acts of terror, while some may have a competing interest in keeping a site running and monitoring it for intelligence value.
Key issues for Congress:
Although the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative addresses a federal cybersecurity strategy and departmental roles and responsibilities, overclassification, competing equities, and poor information sharing between agencies hinder implementation of a national cybersecurity strategy. (See "Federal Government Efforts to Address Cyberterrorism.") Federal agencies have interpreted the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. § 1461), also known as the Smith-Mundt Act, as creating a "firewall" between foreign and domestic audiences, limiting U.S. government counterpropaganda activities on the Internet. (See "Institutional Constraints.") Some agencies favor monitoring and surveillance of potentially harmful websites, while others would shut them down entirely. (See "Intelligence Gain/Loss Calculus.") Different agency approaches to combating terrorists' use of the Internet and different definitions and strategies for activities such as information operations (IO) and strategic communications (SC) create an oversight challenge for Congress. (See "Counterpropaganda: Strategic Communications, Public Diplomacy, and Information Operations.")
Cybersecurity proposals from the 111th Congress such as S. 3480, which contained controversial provisions labeled by the media as the Internet "Kill Switch," are likely to be reintroduced in some form in the 112th Congress. (See "Congressional Activity.") With growing interest in strategic communications and public diplomacy, there may also be an effort to revise the Smith-Mundt Act.