GoldenJackal Target Embassies and Air-Gapped Systems Using Malware Toolsets

On the same subject

• 

  April 21, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  DoD SBIR/STTR Pre-Release: DoD SBIR BAA 21.2, DoD STTR BAA 21.B, Air Force CSO X21.2, Air Force CSO X21.B

  The DoD Small Business and Technology Partnerships Office announces the pre-release of the following Broad Agency Announcements (BAAs) and Commercial Solutions Openings (CSOs): • DoD Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) BAA 21.2 • DoD Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) BAA 21.B • Air Force CSO X21.2 • Air Force CSO X21.B IMPORTANT DATES: • April 21, 2021: Pre-release begins • May 19, 2021: BAA opens, begin submitting proposals in DSIP • June 3, 2021: Topic Q&A closes to new questions at 12:00 p.m. ET • June 17, 2021: BAA closes, full proposals must be submitted in DSIP no later than 12:00 p.m. ET The instructions and topics for these BAAs and CSOs are available on DSIP at https://www.dodsbirsttr.mil/submissions/login and at https://rt.cto.mil/rtl-small-business-resources/sbir-sttr/. Updated DoD SBIR/STTR Program & Proposal Requirements The following requirements are in place for all SBIR and STTR proposal submissions. Details on these requirements can be found in section 5.0 of the 21.2 SBIR and 21.B STTR BAAs and relevant attachments can be found in both BAAs and CSOs. 1. Foreign Ownership Disclosure Requirement • Any offeror submitting a proposal under these BAAs and CSOs will be required to disclose via self-report any foreign ownership or control. Proposers must review Attachment 2: Foreign Ownership or Control Disclosure to determine applicability. Offerors shall also require any proposed subcontractors included in their proposal under this BAA to disclose via self-report any foreign ownership or control. If applicable, an authorized firm representative must complete the Foreign Ownership or Control Disclosure (attached to both 21.2 SBIR and 21.B STTR BAAs). The completed and signed disclosure must be uploaded to Volume 5 of the proposal submission. 2. Contractor Certification Regarding Provision of Prohibited Video Surveillance and Telecommunications Services and Equipment • DoD must comply with Section 889(a)(1)(B) of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2019; therefore, all proposals must include certifications in Federal Acquisition Regulation clauses 52.204-24, 52.204-25, and 52.204-26, executed by the proposer's authorized company representative. The Federal Acquisition Regulation clauses may be found as attachments to both 21.2 SBIR and 21.B STTR BAAs and will be available to download during proposal submission and uploaded to Volume 5: Supporting Documents. 3. Company Commercialization Report (Volume 4) • The Company Commercialization Report (CCR) will be required for all proposal submissions. Proposers must complete the CCR by logging into their account at https://www.sbir.gov/, downloading a PDF copy of the CCR, and uploading the PDF to the DSIP proposal submission. • WARNING: Uploading a new Company Commercialization Report (CCR) under the Firm Information section of DSIP or clicking “Save” or “Submit” in Volume 4 of one proposal submission is considered a change for ALL proposals under any open BAAs or CSOs. If a proposing firm has previously certified and submitted any Phase I or Direct to Phase II proposals under any BAA or CSO that is still open, those proposals will be automatically reopened. Proposing firms will have to recertify and resubmit such proposals. If a proposing firm does not recertify or resubmit such proposals, they will not be considered fully submitted and will not be evaluated. 4. Fraud, Waste and Abuse Training (Volume 6) • The Fraud, Waste and Abuse (FWA) training is required for all proposal submissions. This training can be accessed in the Volume 6 section of the DSIP proposal submission. The training material must be thoroughly reviewed once per year. Plan ahead and leave ample time to complete the training based on the proposal submission deadline. In addition to the proposal requirements above, the BAAs and CSOs have been updated to reflect applicable Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and/or Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) clauses that will be included in SBIR and STTR contracts. Proposers are encouraged to thoroughly review the BAAs/CSOs to remain apprised of programmatic and contractual changes. Topic Q&A Topic Q&A is now available on the Topics and Topic Q&A page in DSIP. Proposers may submit technical questions through the Topic Q&A page at https://www.dodsbirsttr.mil/submissions/login. During pre-release, proposers can contact TPOCs directly or submit questions via Topic Q&A. Once DoD begins accepting proposals on May 19, 2021, no further direct contact between proposers and topic authors is allowed. All questions and answers are posted electronically for general viewing. Topic Q&A will close to new questions on June 3, 2021 at 12:00 p.m. ET, but will remain active to view questions and answers related to the topics until the BAA close. Questions submitted through the Topic Q&A are limited to technical information related to improving the understanding of a topic's requirements. Any other questions, such as those asking for advice or guidance on solution approach, or administrative questions, such as SBIR or STTR program eligibility, technical proposal/cost proposal structure and page count, budget and duration limitations, or proposal due date WILL NOT receive a response. Refer to the Component-specific instructions given at the beginning of that Component's topics for help with an administrative question. Proposers are advised to monitor Topic Q&A during the BAA period for questions and answers and frequently monitor DSIP for updates and amendments to the topics. Learning & Support Visit the Learning & Support section for Job Aids and Help Videos to guide you through submitting and viewing questions and answers in the Topic Q&A, preparing and submitting your proposal in DSIP, and more: https://www.dodsbirsttr.mil/submissions/learning-support/training-materials Questions Email the DSIP Help Desk at DoDSBIRSupport@reisystems.com for assistance with using DSIP. Questions regarding DSIP can be emailed to the DSIP Help Desk and will be addressed in the order received, during normal operating hours (Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. ET). General questions pertaining to a particular DoD Component and the Component-specific BAA instructions should be submitted in accordance with the instructions given at the beginning of that Component's topics. Thank you for your interest in the DoD SBIR/STTR Program. DoD SBIR/STTR Support Team

• 

  February 6, 2019 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security, Other Defence

  Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - February 5, 2019

  NAVY Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is awarded a $90,345,180 modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-incentive-fee contract (N00019-17-C-0001). This modification provides for the identification and execution of cost reduction initiatives to reduce the cost of the F-35 Lightning II Air System. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas, and is expected to be completed in June 2022. Fiscal 2017 aircraft procurement (Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps) funds in the amount of $90,345,180 will be obligated at time of award, all of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This modification combines purchases for the Air Force ($44,929,818; 50 percent); Navy ($26,000,000; 29 percent); and the Marine Corps ($19,415,362; 21 percent). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. Q.E.D. Systems Inc., Virginia Beach, Virginia, was awarded an $11,503,892 cost modification to previously-awarded contract N00024-15-C-4400 for third party advanced planning services in support of Chief of Naval Operations availabilities, Continuous Maintenance Availabilities (CMAVs), inactivation CMAVs, sustainment availabilities, phased modernization availabilities, re-commissioning availabilities, continuous maintenance and emergent maintenance windows of opportunity for Navy surface combatant ship classes (CG 47/DDG 51). Work will be performed in Norfolk, Virginia (53 percent); San Diego, California (36 percent); and Everett, Washington (11 percent), and is expected to be completed by February 2020. Fiscal 2019 operations and maintenance (Navy); and fiscal 2019 other procurement (Navy) funding in the amount of $6,282,400 will be obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. (Awarded Feb. 1,2019) ARMY CACI-ISS Inc., Arlington, Virginia, was awarded a $37,234,235 modification (P00048) to contract W15QKN-15-C-0049 for the Integrated Personnel and Pay System. Work will be performed in Arlington, Virginia, with an estimated completion date of May 31, 2019. Fiscal 2019 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $35,387,111 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, New Jersey, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY SOPAKCO Inc., Mullins, South Carolina, has been awarded a maximum $26,214,300 firm-fixed-price contract for religious and halal Meal Ready to Eat. This was a competitive acquisition with three responses received. This is a five-year contract with no option periods. Location of performance is South Carolina, with a Feb. 4, 2024, performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2019 through 2024 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE3S1-19-DZ117). UPDATE: Hoist Liftruck Manufacturing,* East Chicago, Indiana (SPE8EC-19-D-0038), has been added as an awardee to the multiple-award contract for commercial trucks and trailers, issued against solicitation SPE8EC-17-R-0008, announced April 20, 2017. DEFENSE HEALTH AGENCY Bluewater Federal Solutions Inc., Chantilly, Virginia, was awarded a firm-fixed-price contract for $8,194,502 on Jan. 22, 2019. The contract has an effective date of Feb. 1, 2019 and was awarded following a competitive solicitation conducted amongst small businesses in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 8.405, using General Services Administration eBuy Schedule 70, Special Item Number 132-56. This award provides for non-personal information technology services in support of mobile application development, web design, web development, and necessary support (to include testing, information assurance compliance and risk mitigation in accordance with Department of Defense standards) for Military Health System internet, intranet, and extranet websites, web applications, and mobile applications. The contractor place of performance is Falls Church, Virginia. In addition, this contract provides for four option periods, if exercised. This contract is funded with fiscal 2019 operations and maintenance appropriations in the amount of $8,194,502. The Defense Health Agency, Contracting Office – Health Information Technology, San Antonio, Texas, is the contracting activity (HT0015-19-F-0022). *Small Business https://dod.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/1749121/source/GovDelivery/

• 

  September 23, 2020 | International, Land, Other Defence

  After munition worker deaths, Army floats $16 billion plan to modernize production

  Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― U.S. Army officials told lawmakers Tuesday they are seeking a new 15-year, $16 billion strategy to modernize and automate the military's aging munitions plants following nearly a dozen worker deaths and injuries over recent years. In Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee testimony, Army officials suggested workers who handle dangerous materials could be replaced by robotics and computers as part of their ambitious plan. The testimony came as lawmakers are deliberating over a proposed reshaping of the Pentagon's explosives oversight body, as part of the 2021 defense policy bill. “We're essentially making the explosives in a manner very much like we did in World War I in some cases, World War II in others,” Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology Bruce Jette told lawmakers. “We literally have people standing under machines that are full of 1,500 pounds of molten explosives, drooling it into artillery shells to fill them up, and then they push the carts away. We don't have automation, we don't have robotics.” Lawmakers described the ammunition industrial base as fragile because of its dependence on foreign sources of materials and because its aging facilities need of safety upgrades. (Munitions production facilities are contractor operated, with some owned by the government.) Army officials largely agreed, saying they rely on 55 foreign suppliers for certain equipment and materials ― such as a TNT-replacement 2,4-Dinitroanisole, which comes from India ― because costs, environmental regulations and legal liabilities make many of them harder to develop in the United States. The Army even relies on a small volume of detonators and pyrotechnics from China, Jette said. The Army is studying how to wean itself from foreign suppliers. At the same time, Jette has not ruled out supplies from Canada, Mexico and elsewhere, if a surge is needed, adding that he personally visited a South Korean factory that once supplied the U.S. with bullets at .50 caliber and below. Calling safety a top priority, Army officials said human handling of the energetics, explosives and acids associated with munitions can be replaced with “process automation or other technology solutions, freeing the workforce to focus on technical oversight.” More than 80 percent of major mishaps at munitions facilities were caused by human error, they said. “Three deaths in the last ten years on our facilities, two of them were related to the manufacturing process: We don't need to have that happen anymore,” Jette said. “I do not want to be the ASAALT and get another phone call that there's another death on something I could have provided the improvement to.” Jette said the 2017 death of Lake City Army Ammunition Plant worker Lawrence Bass, 55, “should not have occurred,” and that Bass ― killed while handling an explosive component called tetrazine ― was performing his duties in accordance with procedures. “His death is in fact a catalyst in transforming our approach, as opposed to modernizing under current circumstances. He should never have been in that close proximity where that event could have happened,” Jette said. “Should it happen with a machine, I can buy another machine.” Still, modernizing in the way Army officials seek would require Congress appropriate roughly $1 billion per year for 15 years, which is more than twice what the Army has asked over the last three years. It's an open question whether Congress would be as inclined to support the munitions productions facilities, if they support fewer jobs. “The idea of making it safer for workers, there's no doubt about that, but because these plants have grown up since the '40′s," said Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee Chairman Donald Norcross, D-N.J. "You eliminate many of those jobs, there's potential of that support also going.” Asked what more industry could do to shoulder the cost of modernizing facilities, Jette suggested it would be better if the government made the investments upfront as industry would only pass the costs on later. “This is the United States military's industrial base for munitions. We need to own that, not have anything beholden IP-wise or any other way to the defense industry or any other supplier," Jette said. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/09/22/after-munition-worker-deaths-army-floats-16-billion-plan-to-modernize-production/