USA — ‘Investing in People is Key’ at Cyber Command

WASHINGTON, March 17, 2011 — U.S. Cyber Com­mand is build­ing its work­force, launch­ing efforts with indus­try and work­ing with inter­na­tion­al part­ners to ful­fill an impor­tant mis­sion, the command’s leader said here yes­ter­day.
Cyber­com com­man­der Army Gen. Kei­th B. Alexan­der and James N. Miller, prin­ci­pal deputy under­sec­re­tary of defense for pol­i­cy, dis­cussed the command’s 2012 bud­get request and oth­er issues dur­ing tes­ti­mo­ny before a House Armed Ser­vices Com­mit­tee sub­com­mit­tee.

“Peo­ple are the big thing” at Cyber­com and “for our future invest­ing in peo­ple is key,” Alexan­der told leg­is­la­tors.

Based at Fort Meade, Md., Cyber­com is charged with pro­vid­ing con­nec­tiv­i­ty and safe­guard­ing DOD’s and allies’ world­wide infor­ma­tion net­works. The com­mand reached full oper­a­tional sta­tus on Oct. 31, 2010.

The cyber­se­cu­ri­ty bud­get request for 2011 is a lit­tle under” $3.2 bil­lion and “a lit­tle over” $3.2 bil­lion for 2012, Miller said.

Alexan­der said work­force costs com­prise “the biggest por­tion” of Cybercom’s bud­get.

The next-biggest por­tion of Cybercom’s bud­get pie goes toward facil­i­ties and infor­ma­tion tech­nol­o­gy infra­struc­ture, the gen­er­al added.

“That accounts for anoth­er 25 per­cent of the bud­get, and oper­a­tions are the last part,” Alexan­der said.

Mean­while, Cyber­com is build­ing capac­i­ty, he said, not­ing “the ser­vices are help­ing us do that.”

The gen­er­al said the ser­vices are dis­cussing request­ing pro­fi­cien­cy pay for mil­i­tary lin­guists work­ing at Cyber­com and those with oth­er tech­ni­cal skills, although “right now that’s not an issue.”

“The oth­er thing that we’re look­ing at is how to col­lapse some of our mil­i­tary occu­pa­tion­al spe­cial­ties down into a few that allow us to look at the full spec­trum [of cyber oper­a­tions],” Alexan­der added. “I think we need to do that and the ser­vices have been won­der­ful in set­ting that up.”

A crit­i­cal task for Cyber­com, Miller said, “is to look hard at what we can do under exist­ing author­i­ties, includ­ing mak­ing bet­ter use of the Guard and Reserve.”

The type of peo­ple pos­sess­ing the nec­es­sary skills for duty with Cyber­com “will span a wider range than the stan­dard pro­file for mil­i­tary ser­vice,” Miller said.

Out­reach and pilot pro­grams will help attract those with need­ed skills, Miller said, “so that they see what DOD can pro­vide for their edu­ca­tion and that they can make a con­tri­bu­tion to nation­al secu­ri­ty as well.”

In Jan­u­ary, Alexan­der said, the Navy Post­grad­u­ate School launched a tech­ni­cal master’s degree course either in com­put­er sci­ence or with major­i­ty of cours­es in cyber and cyber­se­cu­ri­ty-relat­ed dis­ci­plines.

“That’s a step in the right direc­tion,” the gen­er­al said.

Inno­v­a­tive joint efforts with fed­er­al agen­cies, Inter­net ser­vice providers and the defense indus­try con­sti­tute anoth­er focus for Cyber­com, Alexan­der told leg­is­la­tors. On Oct. 13, 2010, Defense Sec­re­tary Robert M. Gates and Home­land Secu­ri­ty Sec­re­tary Janet Napoli­tano announced an agree­ment for their agen­cies to work togeth­er on cyber­se­cu­ri­ty issues to pro­tect crit­i­cal mil­i­tary and civil­ian infor­ma­tion tech­nol­o­gy infra­struc­ture.

The agree­ment includ­ed a for­mal mech­a­nism for ben­e­fit­ing from the tech­ni­cal exper­tise of the Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Agency, which is respon­si­ble for pro­tect­ing nation­al secu­ri­ty sys­tems, col­lect­ing relat­ed for­eign intel­li­gence, and enabling net­work war­fare.

“The depart­ment does rec­og­nize that we’re depen­dent on both our part­ners in gov­ern­ment — the dot-gov and our part­ners in indus­try — to be able to con­duct and suc­ceed in mil­i­tary oper­a­tions,” Miller said.

Two efforts under­way to address such issues, Alexan­der said, include the Endur­ing Secu­ri­ty Frame­work and the Defense Indus­tri­al Base pilot pro­gram. The Endur­ing Secu­ri­ty Frame­work, he said, is a part­ner­ship between gov­ern­ment with DHS, DOD, the Direc­tor of Nation­al Intel­li­gence and indus­try to look at crit­i­cal cyber­se­cu­ri­ty issues.

If the part­ner­ship can iden­ti­fy com­mon prob­lems, Alexan­der added, “it’s been our expe­ri­ence that indus­try, in devel­op­ing much of that equip­ment, will go solve them, free to the gov­ern­ment. That is a huge step for­ward and we’ve made some tremen­dous jumps in that area.”

Under the Defense Indus­tri­al Base pilot pro­gram are two sets of activ­i­ties, Miller said.

“One is a broad defense indus­tri­al-base pilot in which we are shar­ing infor­ma­tion about poten­tial threats and look­ing at how to do that more effec­tive­ly,” he said. “It’s been a two-way street and very effec­tive. We’re look­ing to grow that.”

In the sec­ond part, Cyber­com is work­ing with sev­er­al defense indus­tri­al base com­pa­nies and Inter­net ser­vice providers in a tech­nol­o­gy-shar­ing project that has not yet been launched, Miller said.

“It’s some­thing that I hope we’re very close to ini­ti­at­ing, he added.

Work­ing with inter­na­tion­al part­ners is anoth­er key ele­ment in Cybercom’s strat­e­gy, Miller said.

Because the Unit­ed States “fights in a coali­tion,” he said, the U.S. mil­i­tary real­izes “the secu­ri­ty of our infor­ma­tion and our oper­a­tions both depend on the secu­ri­ty of our part­ners’ and allies’ net­works.”

Sig­nif­i­cant focus has been placed on work­ing with the mil­i­taries of Great Britain, Aus­tralia, New Zealand and Cana­da, Miller said.

“We have long-stand­ing rela­tion­ships with them, and on intel­li­gence issues, and that’s been a good foun­da­tion for what we do in cyber as well,” he added.

Anoth­er sig­nif­i­cant effort over the past year, Miller said, involved work­ing with NATO and mak­ing cyber­se­cu­ri­ty a key thrust of the NATO Strate­gic Con­cept at the Lis­bon Sum­mit. “The cyber­se­cu­ri­ty cen­ter that’s been estab­lished has begun to oper­ate,” he said, “but we have a lot more work to do there in NATO in terms of imple­ment­ing that effort.” The com­mand also is begin­ning to have “use­ful con­ver­sa­tions” on cyber­se­cu­ri­ty with South Korea and Japan, Miller said.

“We also need to have con­ver­sa­tions about cyber and oth­er strate­gic issues with Rus­sia and Chi­na,” he added. “We’ve made some head­way with respect to Rus­sia in hav­ing the ini­tial con­ver­sa­tions on cyber­se­cu­ri­ty.”

Asked what grade, on a scale of “A” to “F,” Alexan­der would give the Defense Depart­ment for its abil­i­ty to defend its net­works, the admi­ral said he would give DOD a “C.” “When you look [from] the prob­lems we had on our net­works a few years ago to where we are today, it’s a huge improve­ment,” the gen­er­al said.

“I’d like to say an ‘A,’ but I think it’s going to take us some time to get to an ‘A,’ ” which Alexan­der described as rep­re­sent­ing an impen­e­tra­ble net­work.

“But we have made it extreme­ly dif­fi­cult for adver­saries to get in, and every day we improve that,” the gen­er­al said.

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs)

More news and arti­cles can be found on Face­book and Twit­ter.

Fol­low GlobalDefence.net on Face­book and/or on Twit­ter

Team GlobDef

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist GlobalDefence.net im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. GlobalDefenc.net war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →