Retour aux nouvelles

8 mai 2019 | International, Terrestre, C4ISR

The Army looks to build up its cyber arsenal

By:

The Army is building a new tactical cyber force and it's going to need an arsenal. Immediately stocking one is another story, however, because “offensive cyber” tools are currently developed and owned by U.S. Cyber Command for the joint mission, so the Army is working on how to best equip its teams' specific needs.

The Army's 915th Cyber Warfare Support Battalion (CWSB) will be capable of conducting localized cyber effects through the electromagnetic spectrum, rather than the IP-based operations conducted by Cyber Command, though it might have a tie-in with these forces and capabilities.

The CWSB will operate as an Army Cyber Command asset. It will live at the division level with 12 expeditionary cyber teams, each consisting of 45-person detachment-sized elements that will be in support of brigade combat teams and arrayed over that brigade's battlespace on the ground. They will likely operate alongside companies.

In order to prepare these new cyber teams, the Army will have to work through the Joint Cyber Warfighter Architecture (JCWA), a singular approach to tools and platforms for high-end, remote cyber operators established by Cyber Command.

“By defining that architecture, then Cyber Command encourages the service cyber components with their acquisition entities to propose capabilities that would meet that architecture,” Ronald Pontius, deputy to the commanding general at Army Cyber Command, told Fifth Domain on the sidelines of an industry conference May 1. “Cyber Command should lead the architecture and standards, then they should be looking to the services to actually build the capability.”

The JCWA is intended to guide capability development across all the services, as Cyber Command doesn't want capabilities designed and used by one service. How that translates into equipping these Army-specific entities requires working out “synergies” between that tactical force and the larger force, so determining what common and custom tools the CWSB uses will be in concert with the joint Cyber Command forces.

“It all has to be integrated from top to bottom,” Kenneth Strayer, deputy program manager for electronic warfare and cyber at Program Executive Office-Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and Sensors, told Fifth Domain. “All the way from sanctuary through developing capabilities to delivering capabilities. This all has to be integrated and it's all nested on Cyber Command and ARCYBER, [which] is a component, and the tactical units are all nested under ARCYBER.”

Strayer added that he wouldn't separate them, but obviously the needed capabilities will be different depending on the placement of units, either in the close fight on the ground or in remote sanctuary.

Questions Army Cyber Command leaders will have to wrestle with regarding using tools from the joint force at the tactical level include what infrastructure forces will operate on, and whether the tool will be attributable or not. Pontius said generally tools should be 100-percent attributable in the tactical space [letting victims know the United States is attacking them as a deterrent of further action], while that is not always the case in the joint environment.

Having the CWSB in Army Cyber Command and not distributed throughout the service, he added, aids in answering these questions, optimizing tool development, and keeping the force trained and certified much more efficiently than if members of this force were spread out across different Army entities.

One way the Army is potentially benefiting the CWSB separate from the joint mission is a recent $1 billion contract for research and development work in support of the cyber mission. Contractors awarded are tasked with providing research into cyber and electromagnetic activities (CEMA) capabilities. The contract currently is not asking for any materiel development.

https://www.fifthdomain.com/dod/army/2019/05/06/the-army-looks-to-build-up-its-cyber-arsenal/

Sur le même sujet

  • Marines need to equip defensive cyber teams

    14 décembre 2018 | International, C4ISR

    Marines need to equip defensive cyber teams

    By: Mark Pomerleau The Marines are looking to develop and equip specialized tactical cyber teams with a specific defensive tool set. These teams, known as defensive cyber operations-internal defensive measures (DCO-IDM) companies, are designed to help defend critical digital assets at the tip of the spear. These companies will fall under the newly established Marine Expeditionary Force Information Groups, or MIGs, and one will reside within each MEF providing MEF commanders information-related capabilities to include cyber, intelligence, electronic warfare and information operations. All three DCO-IDM companies have reached the minimum threshold for deployment,though their specific kits are not in place yet, Gregg Kendrick, executive director of Marine Corps Forces Cyberspace Command, said Dec. 6 at the Charleston Defense Contractors Association Defense Summit. In the interim, service-retained cyber protection teams — strategic-level defensive cyber teams that feed up to U.S. Cyber Command — are partnering with the companies to conduct operations and participate in exercises. These companies will serve as a “paired down version” of cyber protection teams in the cyber mission force and be employed at the Marine Air Ground Task Force level, said MGySgt Carlos Torres, senior enlisted Marine in the cyberspace division for the Deputy Commandant for Information, during the annual C4ISRNET Conference in May. The companies have used the expertise from cyber protection teams and Marine Corps Forces Cyberspace Command throughout their establishment. Kendrick said the companies and elements of a cyber protection team participated in the NATO-led Trident Juncture exercise in Norway that took place from Oct. 25 to Nov. 7. Kenneth Bible, deputy director of the C4 directorate and deputy CIO, said Trident Juncture served as a good example of giving these teams exposure to operations and commanders, who want this capability. Kendrick added that the deputy commandant for information, which oversees all aspects of information for the Corps, to include the MIGs, requested Marines with intelligence backgrounds to go to each of the DCO-IDM companies. This will allow them to begin the process of establishing an organic intelligence support ability in the defensive cyber sphere as opposed to having to rely on outside resources, such as Marine Corps Forces Cyberspace Command. This is critical given the expeditionary and tactical nature of these teams. https://www.fifthdomain.com/dod/marine-corps/2018/12/11/marines-need-to-equip-defensive-cyber-teams/

  • Contracts for March 23, 2021

    24 mars 2021 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Contracts for March 23, 2021

    Today

  • Delay hits production decision for US Army’s critical battle command system

    25 novembre 2020 | International, Terrestre, C4ISR

    Delay hits production decision for US Army’s critical battle command system

    By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — A production decision for the U.S. Army's critical battle command system has been delayed, the service confirmed to Defense News. An Office of the Secretary of Defense-level Defense Acquisition Board review was scheduled for Nov. 17, but due to some administrative issues, the board was unable to make a decision on the way forward for a program that has already experienced years of delays and setbacks. The Northrop Grumman-developed battle command system was originally meant to serve as the command-and-control system for the Army's future Integrated Air and Missile Defense System against regional ballistic missile threats, but the service has since expanded its planned role to tie together a much broader array of sensors and shooters capable of defeating other complex threats like cruise missiles and unmanned aircraft. To date, the Army has spent $2.7 billion to develop the system. “A small number of statutory and regulatory documents supporting the Milestone C [production] decision are in the final stages of approval, but not yet fully approved,” an Army spokesperson wrote in an emailed statement. “The program office and OSD directorates will hold technical briefings to obtain final approval signatures on some of the open documents. Document completion is largely administrative.” Specifically, final approval is needed for the program protection plan, the life-cycle sustainment plan and an update to the Capabilities Development Document, the spokesperson said. The principal members of the Defense Acquisition Board “concurred with the program's achievement of all Engineering & Manufacturing Development Phase exit criteria,” the statement noted. Ellen Lord, the undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, directed a follow-on meeting within 30 days to review document completion status. That review is anticipated to take place in mid-December. The delay in reaching a production decision is not expected to affect the Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System program schedule — at least in terms of operational testing and other major milestones ahead. The program struggled in 2016 during a limited-user test, but following several soldier checkouts and other test events over the past few years as well as a successful limited-user test this summer, it is expected the battle command system will be approved for production. Once approved for production, it will move into an initial operational test and evaluation phase in 2021. The Army plans to equip its first unit with the system in the third or fourth quarter of fiscal 2022. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/11/24/production-decision-for-armys-critical-battle-command-system-delayed/

Toutes les nouvelles