Navy Cybersecurity Enlisted - Sailors assigned to the Cyber Competition Group are participating in a flag challenge on the U.S. Fleet Cyber Command at Fort Meade, Maryland.
Navy Cyber is a rudderless ship. While every other service has a single cyber engineer, the Navy's cyber intelligence resides in three separate areas. As a result, these three communities are full of unnecessary problems and no one is fully equipped or able to control the area. To address this issue, the Navy must consolidate cyber responsibilities, invest in a community of cyber warfare engineers, and require deep technical expertise in all cyber roles.
Navy Cybersecurity Enlisted
Leadership and management of Navy cyber is currently divided between cryptologic warfare officers (CWOs), information professionals (IPs), and cyber warfare engineers (CWEs). CWOs are primarily responsible for offensive and operational security challenges, IPs for information technology systems operations, and CWEs for technical engineering work that enables cyber operations (eg conducting research on vulnerabilities, exploits and capability development). This model may seem reasonable to those unskilled in cyber operations, but it severely limits the service from understanding the potential of cyber warfare.
Impact Of Senior Enlisted Leader International Summit Far Reaching, Strategic > Air Education And Training Command > Article Display
CWOs are overstretched—forced to combine five different areas of expertise without the focus or depth required. IPs have some technical depth but are not sufficient for complex cyber defense tasks, such as malware engineering. CWEs have the ability to do everything cyber, but they are very few in number (currently only 68 employees). Because of this division of responsibility, key cyber decisions are made by people who are not technical experts, and these communities are not aligned to capture the value that each individual brings.
Navy cyber also suffers from neglect and neglect. Navy leaders have the misconception that cyber is a joint effort from which the Navy does not benefit. However, each service has specific uses for cyber experts and the Navy has done little to invest in cyber security. This underestimation creates a negative feedback loop that is exacerbated by the lack of interest shown by the CWO community. Continuing to allow cyber responsibility to fester will turn this misconception into reality. If the Navy continues on its current path, it will not contribute to cyber warfare in the next war.
The CWO community (about 900 officers), the de facto primary cyber community, also provides expertise in intelligence features and all information operations functions (electronic warfare, operational security, military deception, and military information support functions). It is difficult enough for a single officer community to develop expertise in each of these missions, let's add the cyber mission. The leaders of the CWO community have failed to understand both the importance and the unique needs of cyber warfare, resulting in no way to develop cyber experts within their ranks and causing cyber to be underestimated.
Often, CWOs are considered cyber experts and are assigned to command Cyber or Revolutionary (Florida) A cyber expert must be able to solve complex technical problems related to computer security with little support because they understand the underlying technology and have enough breadth and depth in many areas of cyber. Cyber is much bigger than many think: cryptography, forensics, vulnerability research, penetration testing, exploitation, (cyber) operations, steganography, malware, cyber threat intelligence , reverse engineering, networking, and development (including exploits, payments, and results. ). Given all their information warfare duties, that CWOs can be cyber experts is a lie. Even with cyber and NPS master's degree programs, CWOs without several years of concentrated work in professional technical fields are nothing more than cyber hobbyists.
Navy Cryptologic Warfare Officers Cannot Do Cyber
In addition, the CWO community has no way of filtering technical talent, and does not value technical ability. While CWOs claim to value technical talent by encouraging applicants to have STEM degrees, it is not necessary and knowledge gained in academia is used. This is clear from their published lifestyles.
The CWO community fails to understand the scale, capabilities and diversity within the cyber space. Viewing it as a unified skill where one can get enough "cyber-stink" after completing one assignment at the National Security Agency (NSA), the CWO community continues to underestimate the unique challenges associated with operations', skill development, and management. workers. Most CWOs view cyber as a black box and not the environment it is. Nicolas Chaillan, the Air Force's first chief software officer said: "Please stop putting a senior commander or [lieutenant colonel] (despite their dedication, special attitude, and culture) in charge [of technical projects affecting millions of users] when I have no prior experience in this area." ,” he wrote. “We wouldn't put a pilot in the cockpit without extensive flight training; why would we expect someone with no IT experience to come close to success? "
Currently, there is no incentive for the CWO and IP community to develop real expertise in the internet and the effective work of the communications officer, as this would require prioritizing internet communications in their traditional areas of expertise. Because of this, each community invests very little in cyber technology, which undermines cyber. This cycle of negative reporting has the NSA and other military services viewing the Navy as the poor man in all things cyber. Even the US Cyber Command understands this and does not list a Navy CWO as a civilian cyber officer on the job sheet (the Navy's enlisted cryptologic technician rating is included).
The CWO and IP community is unable to retain true cyber talent, as those officers with the ability and desire to become cyber experts feel underutilized and undervalued. Why become a cyber expert when your society forces you to keep taking unrelated jobs? Even if CWOs with cyber talent are to continue their service, they must check the boxes in the five CWO areas or risk failure to promote. If they are lucky, they may get a cyber job every third or fourth tour, for a total of two or three tours in 25-30 years of work.
Military Must Do More To Tackle Cyber Threats To 3d Printing, Watchdog Says
Apparently, the CWO community didn't understand the lessons identified in the book Range- sample and get different experiences in the first few years of the job, then train for excellence, don't get stuck in different things forever. The Army, Air Force and Marine Corps do not require their officers to be part-time cyber officers, instead dedicating a large community (the Air Force has about 3,000 cyber officers) to the problem and building career paths around creativity. cyber leaders. These services don't have a cyber officer job that includes redundant assignments to family soldiers or aviation maintenance soldiers so that their officers can have "real military" experience. However, the Navy CWO community does.
According to the Secretary of the Navy's March 2019 Cybersecurity Readiness, "the Navy's culture, systems, structure and equipment are not suited to this new era" and "a true appreciation of the cyber threat is still lacking. of the [Marine] culture." The Navy often talks about the importance of cyber, but its actions do not clearly match its words. CWOs should not be the ones making decisions about cyberspace, and its lack of cyber expertise has failed to prepare the Navy for many events. For example, the creation of the Cybersecurity Force of the Navy and Operation Rolling Tide
The cyber warfare engineering community is made to be the home of true cyber professionals. Unfortunately, CWEs face many challenges that some residents are unwilling to address. The CWE community is currently small and understaffed to take on every cyber mission, and is not billeted for some of the Navy's most important cyber operations. Most of the CWE bills are at the Navy Cyber Warfare Development Group in Suitland, Maryland, and at the NSA down the road. The CWE community has so far been unsuccessful in obtaining bids from several Navy and Joint commands. Growing a community in a Department of Defense (DoD) environment is a slow and difficult process, and with few modifications it means taking buildings from other communities, something no community in the Army is willing to allow, even buildings. you go. it has not been filled for years.
What makes the CWE community capable of cyberspace is its focus on developing deep expertise. CWEs have significant advantages over other communities for admission due to the professional interview process and strict STEM degree requirements. In order to be competitive, applicants must already have in-depth technical knowledge in security. Candidates compete in a 48-hour capture-the-flag screener, followed by challenging program assignments, and, finally, a tough technical interview. Once in the community, CWEs are sent through a rigorous six-month training pipeline where failure is not tolerated. This is similar to basic underwater demolition / SEAL (BUD/S) underwater training - Navy or Nuclear Energy Navy school, only for attackers. Only the best talent is selected, with less than 30 percent of applicants who test positive in the flag capture event and less than 40 percent who pass the interview. This results in more than 95 percent of CWEs completing the training pipeline, much better than a civilian Navy.
Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard Release Maritime Strategy > U.s. Indo Pacific Command > 2015
Ruger 556 review, vg6 epsilon 556 review, msar stg 556 review, sinn 556 review, sinn 556 i review, meridian 556 review, eotech 556 review, precor efx 556 elliptical review, benchmade 556 review, surefire sfmb 556 review, precor efx 556 review, sinn 556 anniversary review
0 Comments