How do we prevent the marvel of cyberspace from becoming a minefield?
That question is at the heart of federal legislation to regulate computer security at private utilities.
As much as 85 percent of our nation's water, electrical, nuclear and other providers are owned and operated by private firms.
Advances in technology have boosted the efficiency of delivering those essential services.
Protecting that technology from hackers, criminals and terrorists, however, is a growing concern.
A proposal under discussion in the U.S. Senate would grant government - specifically the Department of Homeland Security - greater authority to oversee and regulate security at private companies.
Still under development, the proposal has created controversy - both from critics who believe it is too intrusive and others who find it too weak.
Much of the disagreement centers on whether Homeland Security is the proper agency to investigate and enforce security measures.
We're not confident a bureaucracy as massive as the U.S. government - acting through one of its agencies - can monitor effectively the complex security systems at hundreds of large corporations through the country.
We find some solace in the statement by U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn. and chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. He said: "Where the market has worked, and systems are appropriately secure, we don't interfere. But where the market has failed, and critical systems are insecure, the government has a responsibility to step in."
Our concern is whether federal employees will be more adept at identifying insecure systems than company officials, who have a vested interest in secure delivery of services.
If not, this proposal only adds another layer of ineffective and expensive government bureaucracy paid by taxpayers.
Although it is too early to make the call on the developing issue, we remain skeptical while we scrutinize the proposal's progress.