THN Recap: Top Cybersecurity Threats, Tools and Tips (Nov 25 - Dec 1)

Sur le même sujet

• 

  12 janvier 2021 | International, Aérospatial

  La DGA officialise la réussite des premiers essais en vol du viseur d’étoiles diurne Vision

  Safran Electronics & Defense et Sodern offrent à la France une technologie inédite, applicable à plusieurs domaines stratégiques. Un nouveau potentiel de croissance économique pour les industriels. Un projet innovant Nous avions présenté en juin 2020 le projet de système de navigation innovant qui vise les étoiles en plein jour, et est capable de fonctionner sur avion, malgré le Soleil et au travers de l'atmosphère. Le projet est développé depuis 2016 par Safran Electronics & Defense (responsable du projet et de la fonction navigation) et Sodern (responsable de la fonction de visée stellaire), à la demande de la Direction Générale de l'Armement (DGA) et de l'Agence de l'innovation de défense (AID). Désormais appelé Vision, le démonstrateur de visée stellaire diurne a été testé pour la première fois en novembre-décembre dernier à bord d'un banc d'essais volant. Embarquement sur banc d'essai volant Quatre vols d'essais (trois de jour et un de nuit) ont été réalisés par la DGA Maîtrise de l'information (DGA MI), l'expert technique du Ministère des Armées pour les systèmes d'information et de communication, la cybersécurité, la guerre électronique et les systèmes de missiles tactiques et stratégiques. Les vols ont duré une dizaine d'heures au total, à différentes altitudes. Tout au long des trajectoires de chaque vol, de nombreuses étoilées ont été accrochées et poursuivies de manière fine par le démonstrateur. Vers une production en série La France se retrouve ainsi pionnière sur cette technologie d'avant-garde, tandis que Sodern y voit un fort potentiel de croissance. Le concept désormais prouvé, l'industriel prévoit de développer un prototype raffiné cette année, puis préparer la production en série du produit d'ici 2025, d'abord pour les Armées, puis éventuellement pour le marché civil. C'est un grand nombre d'appareils qui pourrait bénéficier de ces nouveaux viseurs d'étoiles : aéronefs de transport et de ravitaillement, drones longue endurance, avions d'arme, navires, voire même, selon l'AID, des missiles à long terme. Sodern se réjouit que sa technologie puisse ainsi profiter à d'autres technologies et être essaimée dans d'autres secteurs. https://www.air-cosmos.com/article/la-dga-officialise-la-russite-des-premiers-essais-en-vol-du-viseur-dtoiles-diurne-vision-24060

• 

  12 février 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - February 11, 2019

  U.S. SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND Institute of Applied Engineering Inc. (IAE), University of South Florida (USF), Tampa, Florida, was awarded an $85,000,000 maximum indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract (H92405-20-D-0001) in support of U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) for access to applied research and advanced technology development. USSOCOM will collaborate with IAE to conduct research, hardware and software development, test and evaluation, demonstration, prototyping, and limited system production. Additionally, IAE will facilitate access to USF education and training resources. The work will be performed in Tampa and is expected to be completed by Feb. 9, 2025. The contract was awarded through other than full and open competition. USSOCOM headquarters, Tampa, Florida, is the contracting activity. (Awarded Feb. 10, 2020) L3Harris Technologies Inc., Clifton, New Jersey, was awarded a $48,715,001 modification on an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-incentive-fee, and cost reimbursable contract (H9224120D0001) for the Suite of Integrated Radio Frequency Countermeasures program for U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). This modification for program management, contractor logistics support, field service representatives and travel raises the contract ceiling to $50,000,000. The majority of the work will be performed in Clifton, New Jersey. This contract is a non-competitive award in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302.1. USSOCOM headquarters, Tampa, Florida, is the contracting activity. NAVY Tekla Research Inc.,* Fredericksburg, Virginia, is awarded an $82,999,168 cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost reimbursable, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. This contract provides test and evaluation engineering, prototyping, and integration of warfare systems into Navy aircraft and aviation systems. In addition, this contract provides developmental test and evaluation of lab, ground, and flight-testing of newly installed or developmental systems and/or modifications to fleet-deployed systems as well as data gathering to support potentially new systems, improve existing systems, and experimentation and testing of prototypes. Work will be performed in Patuxent River, Maryland (96.5%); China Lake, California (1%); Point Mugu, California (1%); Norfolk, Virginia (1%); and Lakehurst, New Jersey (0.5%), and is expected to be completed in March 2025. No funds will be obligated at the time of award. Funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. This contract was a small business set-aside, competitively procured via an electronic request for proposal; two offers were received. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00421-20-D-0024). The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri is awarded $19,271,301 for a firm-fixed-priced delivery order N00383-20-F-0AY0 under a previously awarded basic ordering agreement (N00383-18-G-AY01) for the repair of various avionics equipment used on the F/A-18 aircraft. Work will be performed in Lemoore, California (99%); and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (1%). Work will be completed by December 2022. Annual working capital funds (Navy) in the full amount of $19,271,301 will be obligated at the time of award and funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. One source was solicited for this sole-source requirement pursuant to the authority set forth in 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1) and one offer was received. Naval Supply Systems Command Weapon Systems Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the contracting activity. AIR FORCE Lockheed Martin Corp., Fort Worth, Texas, has been awarded a $67,584,243 firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee modification (PZ0010) to contract FA8615-16-C-6048 for upgrading F-16s for the government of Singapore. Work will be performed at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, Fort Worth, Texas; and in Singapore. This contract is expected to be completed by June 30, 2023, and is a Foreign Military Sales acquisition for the government of Singapore. This contract was a sole-source acquisition, and the total cumulative face value of the contract is $1,008,584,243. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity. Cyber Systems & Services Solutions, Bellevue, Nebraska, has been awarded a $17,590,503 firm-fixed-price and cost-plus-fixed-fee modification (P0009) to contract FA8773-18-D-0002 to exercise Option II for Defensive Cyber Realization, Integration, and Operational Support (DCRIOS) services. Work will be performed at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, Texas, and is expected to be completed Feb. 28, 2021. This modification is the result of a competitive acquisition and seven offers were received. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $10,934,344.00 are being obligated at the time of award. The 38th Contracting Squadron, Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, Texas, is the contracting activity. ARMY Great Lakes Dredge & Deck Co. LLC, Old Brook, Illinois, was awarded a $17,573,575 firm-fixed-price contract for maintenance dredging of Baltimore Harbor and York Spit Channel, Chesapeake. Bids were solicited via the internet with four received. Work will be performed in Chesapeake, Virginia, with an estimated completion date of Aug. 9, 2020. Fiscal 2020 cost-share and civil operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $17,573,575 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W912DR-20-C-0006). Safariland LLC, Casper, Wyoming, was awarded an $8,944,506 firm-fixed-price contract for a 12-gauge, direct-fire, low-hazard, non-shrapnel producing shell. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Feb. 11, 2025. U.S. Army Contracting Command, New Jersey, is the contracting activity (W15QKN-20-F-0161). Midwest Construction Co.,* Nebraska City, Nebraska, was awarded a $7,310,007 firm-fixed-price contract for levee rehabilitation. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work will be performed in Papillion, Nebraska, with an estimated completion date of Sept. 30, 2020. Fiscal 2019 civil flood control and coastal emergencies funds in the amount of $7,310,007 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska is the contracting activity (W9128F-20-C-0012). *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2081595/source/GovDelivery/

• 

  31 juillet 2018 | International, Terrestre

  A new cold war: How the Army is preparing for a fight in the Arctic

  By: Todd South As Russia beefs up its Arctic presence with new units, equipment and weaponry for the cold weather fight, the Army has slowly begun to shift some resources to improving its own capabilities — though it lags behind its Arctic allies and lacks large-scale capacity to train or provide high numbers of troops for a potential Arctic battle. Melting polar ice is opening a region once thought nearly impenetrable to competition for shipping traffic, natural resources and potential land grabs some experts think could start a new Cold War. In recent years, Canada, Norway and Russia have realigned their focus to improving and expanding their Arctic capabilities. Along with those neighboring nations, which include Denmark, Finland and Sweden, the United States and United Kingdom all have varying levels of competing claims on Arctic resources. It wasn't always so. As recently as 2012, experts such as Siemon Weizeman with the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute were analyzing cooperative efforts between Russia, the United States and other Arctic nations. In the U.S. Department of Defense 2013 Arctic Strategy, Russia is barely mentioned. But following the 2014 war in Ukraine, stoked by Russia, leaders have shifted their view about the nation's role in the Arctic. In that time, Russia has pushed resources in that direction. Its 2014 Russian Military Doctrine paper for the first time included the task of “protecting Russian interests in the Arctic.” So far, that's included building up to 40 heavy icebreaking ships, more than a dozen new airfields, 16 deep-water ports, a broad range of tactical airpower, dedicated training centers, and stationing of paratroopers, counterterrorism, electronic warfare and other forces in the region, said Maj. Gen. Laurie Hummel, adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard, at a June conference on Guard interests in the Arctic. The talk was put on by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Those ground forces include naval infantry and two army brigades on the Kola Peninsula, with aims to guard the Northern Sea route. And all of that is tied together under a recently established Russian Arctic Strategic Command, Hummel said. In addition, although China does not border the Arctic, it has “aspirational” goals for the region and wants to exploit sea lane passages for shipping and fishing waters, she said. In January, China released its first Arctic strategy white paper titled the “Polar Silk Road.” The paper focuses on Arctic shipping routes and states a cooperative goal for infrastructure and other development. China's polar strategy echoes its One Belt One Road policy in Africa, which seeks partnerships to provide natural resources such as oil, gas and minerals. The Chinese government is looking to a liquefied natural gas project in northern Russia called Yamal to supply it with millions of tons of fuel a year upon program fruition. These and other factors are pushing key U.S. military and government leaders to look at how to shore up Arctic capabilities. “It is time for our nation to have a comprehensive and overarching arctic strategy,” Hummel said at the Wilson Center conference. Shifting priorities Right now, the U.S. military's ground forces under U.S. Army Alaska, which falls under Indo-Pacific Command, includes a combined force of only 25,000 active duty, National Guard and Reserve troops. That's about 2.5 percent of the entire force. In recent years, the Army has increased unit training in the Arctic, including airborne operations in 2014, armored vehicle deployment exercises in 2015, and the return of the 75th Ranger Regiment to Alaska for training for the first time since 2001. As of 2016, the Northern Warfare Training Center hosted an estimated 1,400 troops annually for training in an arctic region. The Northern Warfare Training Center in Alaska provided the following numbers of troops trained there over the past decade: Cold Weather Leaders Course — 3,025 Cold Weather Orientation Course — 1,188 Basic Military Mountaineering Course — 1,440 Advanced Military Mountaineering Course — 150 Mountain Warfare Orientation Course — 360 Military Ski Course — 36 Total all events (some not listed) — 7,100 NWTC focuses on small units and training unit leaders in effective cold weather and mountaineering skills. It seldom hosts large units, said John Pennell, spokesman for U.S. Army Pacific Command. Other training areas are available, though they are more accurately classified as subarctic than Arctic, and that has major implications. In 2015, Fort Drum, New York, home of the 10th Mountain Division, was reclassified from Zone 5 to Zone 7, which put it in the ranks of Fort Wainwright, Alaska, and Camp Ethan Allen in Jericho, Vermont. The shift pushed an additional $12.5 million in funding for equipment and infrastructure to the site. Some Army funding has also gone to upgrade individual equipment for soldiers at Fort Drum, Fort Wainwright and in Italy. New items include new gloves, headgear, sleds and skis. In June, the Army posted a Request for Information from industry on building an over-the-snow vehicle capable of operating in 50-below conditions. Dubbed the Joint All Weather All Terrain Support Vehicle, or JAASV, it would replace the decades-old Small Unit Support Vehicle, or SUSV, a tracked vehicle that typically supports an infantry platoon-sized element. How cold is too cold? New equipment, even a new vehicle, doesn't necessarily equal a force ready to perform in truly Arctic conditions. Capt. Nathan Fry, the officer-in-charge of the U.S. Army Mountain Warfare School's training division, told Army Times that people unfamiliar with Arctic environments often confuse “northern training,” which can be cold weather or high-altitude focused, with Arctic training. But the two are not equal. As Fry noted, gear that works well in freezing conditions can fail spectacularly when temperatures drop to minus-50 Fahrenheit. He would know. For the past few years, he's been one of the U.S. representatives on the Guerrier Nordique team that spends weeks in Arctic and sub-Arctic areas of Canada. The exercise began in 2012 and was, in some ways, a small-scale attempt to recapture lost lessons of Arctic warfare that were explored regularly and in depth by the U.S. military throughout the 1940s and 1950s, as the United States prepared for a potential Cold War through operations such as Ice Cap in Greenland, Nanook, Snow Chute, Snow Drop, Snow Fall and Snow Storm. There must be a better understanding of the differences between cold weather and Arctic training, Fry said. Some think that if soldiers can fight in minus-10-degree weather, then they can do it at 60 degrees below zero. “That's just not true,” Fry said. “It's just like the mountain warfare fight, it's really tricky.” Fry left active duty Army service in part to go to his current post at the Guard-run mountain warfare school and push for more work and preparation in the Arctic sphere. Outside of the annual Arctic Eagle Exercise with U.S. Army Alaska and the recent Fort Drum conference, Fry said he's not seen a lot of improved Arctic policy. “From my foxhole, I haven't seen a whole lot of forward progress,” Fry said. But the interest is there. Fry said that his school has seen a drastic increase in demand for mountain and cold weather training, and they began running extra classes to meet the need. And next year's calendar is filling quickly. Though a byproduct of the school's mountain and cold weather training can better inform soldiers on how to plan, survive and fight in some ways in extreme conditions, it is not Arctic focused. Items that are simple in normal weather conditions — how much fuel will people and vehicles need to stay warm and conduct operations? What rate of travel can be expected for either mounted or dismounted soldiers? How much water will soldiers need? — are complicated in extreme cold weather. Soldiers can have a frozen 5-gallon water jug but not be able to use it. “If I can't melt it, then I can't drink it,” Fry said. “Lack of fuel will absolutely shut you down.” While some cold weather training teaches students to use snow, the amount of water yield from snow is far less than ice. And leaders must plan for fuel use to melt the snow or the ice in ways they wouldn't have to in a desert or woodland environment. Fitting it all in And most training, from that being done in Alaska, Vermont or New York, is at the small unit, tactical level. “We are not thinking in terms of a staff exercise,” Fry said. “We're not testing brigade staff on how to conduct resupply missions in cold weather environments.” And that's a problem when soldiers are in extreme, austere environments where the only resources are those that they bring with them. Fry pointed to work that the Marines have long done with the Norwegians as something the Army should consider. Marines rotate a force of 300 to Norway for extended joint training. That number was recently more than doubled to 700. One suggestion the captain has might be to value Arctic training the same way the Army does airborne qualifications, including with a Skill Qualification Identifier. That number makes it easier for leadership to track how many soldiers have the appropriate training. And that mentality, coupled with an integrated Arctic focus similar to that given to airborne training, would help commanders prioritize unit training to emphasize those qualifications and seek more training opportunities. For example, the 10th Mountain Division is designated as a light infantry unit. That means that although its soldiers have access to mountain training and the current commander has emphasized “putting the mountain back into 10th Mountain,” without Army-directed prioritization those skills can fall to the bottom of the checklist. Small changes, such as a Skill Qualification Identifier, can direct the focus of commanders and resources, Fry said. “It's like being in the 82nd Airborne Division,” Fry said. “Do we do range time or refresher jumps? Somehow they fit it all in.” https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/07/30/a-new-cold-war-how-the-army-is-preparing-for-a-fight-in-the-arctic/