Federal Agencies and the Fight Against Cybercrime
This paper examines the roles of three U.S. federal agencies—the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Secret Service—in combating cybercrime. It explores the structural and bureaucratic challenges that hinder effective collaboration among these agencies, including budget misalignment and conflicting investigative priorities. The paper also considers how the government might better align its efforts against digital threats by partnering more closely with the private sector. Drawing on peer-reviewed security research and policy analysis, the paper argues that fragmented agency missions and inadequate inter-agency communication leave critical infrastructure and financial systems unnecessarily vulnerable.
- Introduction: The Federal Cybercrime Challenge: Overview of three agencies tackling cybercrime
- Agency Roles and Structural Tensions: DHS and Secret Service mission misalignment issues
- The FBI's Controversial Approach to Cyber Security: FBI wiretap proposal and privacy concerns
- Aligning Federal and Private Sector Efforts: Recommendations for government-industry cybersecurity partnership
- Conclusion: Call for better inter-agency communication
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Clearly identifies a specific policy problem—fragmented federal cybercrime authority—and grounds it in concrete agency mandates and budget realities.
- Uses a mix of primary sources (agency websites, government reviews) and secondary sources (peer-reviewed journal, news commentary) to build a layered argument.
- Keeps the argument tight and focused for a short-form essay, avoiding scope creep while still covering three distinct agencies.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of institutional critique: rather than attacking individual actors, it shows how organizational structure and mission misalignment produce systemic vulnerabilities. The citation of the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review to document the Secret Service's budget problem is a strong example of using official government documents as evidence against government policy.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by introducing the three agencies and the threat landscape, then moves through each agency's role and limitations in turn. A distinct second section pivots to solutions, citing a peer-reviewed security professional's recommendations for government–industry partnership. The conclusion reinforces the communication theme. The structure follows a classic problem–analysis–solution arc compressed into a short essay format.
Introduction: The Federal Cybercrime Challenge
Computer crime, also known as cybercrime, is a growing and dangerous menace—not just to the federal government and all 50 state governments, but to corporate networks, private computers, and educational institution computer networks as well. Three agencies that form the core of the U.S. federal government's effort to combat computer crimes are the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the FBI, and the Secret Service.
What challenges face these three departments given the independent nature of each agency, and can they cooperate to provide steadfast collaboration against terrorists and other hackers who seek to steal sensitive information and disrupt normal business operations?
Agency Roles and Structural Tensions
The Department of Homeland Security is a massive, multi-agency department with many responsibilities, and cybersecurity is only one of its duties. It is also responsible for border security, customs enforcement (including immigration law), and emergency management through FEMA. The Secret Service operates within the DHS bureaucracy, and while its primary function is the protection of the President of the United States and others in the executive branch, it is also tasked with protecting American currency against counterfeit organizations. Additionally, the Secret Service is assigned to investigate criminal activity involving "fund transfer frauds, access device frauds, false identification documents or devices," a mandate that encompasses cybercrime (law.cornell.edu). The FBI, meanwhile, has become deeply involved in cybercrimes and cyberterrorism since September 11, 2001, fighting organized crime and terrorism through its 56 offices nationwide.
A critical question remains: are these three agencies truly aligned and collaborating to protect computer networks, especially the federal government's most sensitive servers? Evidence suggests otherwise. The Secret Service's investigative mission "does not fit clearly into any of the DHS stated missions," according to the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR) (Harlow, 2011). Furthermore, the Secret Service budget "has not kept pace over the past budget cycles," in part because of the agency's "inability to argue effectively for the need for this capability within DHS" (Harlow, 2). This "lack of attention to this important area of criminal activity"—computer crime in particular—leaves America's financial stability "at risk," according to Harlow.
Conclusion
Scully, the long-time defense professional and security expert, argues that "better communication between cyber-security practitioners and senior executives is essential" (206). Until the DHS, the Secret Service, and the FBI resolve their structural misalignments—budgetary, jurisdictional, and philosophical—the United States will continue to face unnecessary vulnerabilities in its digital defenses. Effective collaboration, both among federal agencies and between government and the private sector, is not optional; it is a prerequisite for meaningful protection against the growing threat of cyberterrorism and digital crime.
Works Cited
Harlow, R. (2011). Two Missions, One Secret Service: The Value of the Investigative Mission. Naval Postgraduate School. Retrieved March 14, 2014, from http://www.hsdl.org.
Department of Homeland Security. (2012). Our Mission. Retrieved March 14, 2014, from
Krieger, M. (2013). How the FBI Wants to Penalize Internet Companies for Providing "Too Much" Security. Liberty Blitzkrieg. Retrieved March 14, 2014, from
Sanchez, J. (2013). FBI's Latest Proposal for a Wiretap-Ready Internet Should be Trashed. Wired. Retrieved March 14, 2014, from http://www.wired.com.
Scully, T. (2011). The cyber threat, trophy information and the fortress mentality. Journal of Business Continuity and Emergency Planning, 5(3), 195–207.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.