INFORMATION INSECURITY


DEFENSIVE TACTICS


Staff Sgt. Brian Jones, an intelligence analyst with the Texas Army National Guard’s 102nd Information Operations (IO) Battalion, monitors his workstation in Austin during Cyber Shield 17 to counter the opposing team’s efforts to hack into his system. The exercise, which was held last spring and included members of the National Guard from 44 states and territories, the U.S. Army Reserve, state and federal government agencies, nongovernmental orga- nizations and private industry, was designed to enhance participants’ ability to respond to cyber incidents. Across DOD and its private- sector partners, efforts are intensifying to safeguard unclassified technical information against cyberattacks. (U.S. Army photo by Maj. Ray McCulloch, 102nd IO Battalion)


in “Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Information Systems and Organizations.” Companies are now required to be in full compliance with these security controls, which went into effect Jan. 1, 2018.


However, recognizing that reactive reporting could only go so far, DOD also determined that there was a need for a strategic effort to address data losses. To supplement the reactive reporting, the department established a joint analysis capability, known as the Joint Acquisi- tion Protection and Exploitation Cell (JAPEC),


to integrate existing acquisi-


tion, intelligence and law enforcement and counterintelligence data, analysis, processes and tools to protect unclassified CTI in DOD’s most critical programs and technologies.


A TERABYTE OF PREVENTION JAPEC is set up to proactively mitigate future losses and exploit opportunities to deter, deny and disrupt adversaries


60 Army AL&T Magazine April-June 2018


that threaten U.S. military advantage by accessing unprotected CTI. It aims to prevent DOD data compromise by increasing the sharing of data and information


deemed and highly counterintelligence


advanta-


geous to potential adversaries across the acquisition, intelligence, security, law enforcement communities.


For example, DOD organizations may share a technology


related to a mis-


sile system. One service identifies this technology as CTI and develops coun- termeasures designed to lower the risks of compromise by the adversary. Tat service then shares this information with the JAPEC community, providing all involved organizations with situational awareness and ultimately raising the abil- ity to thwart adversary attacks.


At the Army level, the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology (ASA(ALT)) is leading a JAPEC Army working group to focus


critical resources and leverage exist- ing program protection processes to enhance protection of CTI. Te work- ing group, with participation from Army G-2, G-3/5/7, the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center, the System of Systems Engineering and Integration Directorate (SOSE&I), the deputy assistant secretary of the Army for research and technol- ogy, and PEOs, is designed to integrate stakeholder activities and resolve policy and process issues. Te working group’s initial actions resulted in an ASA(ALT) policy memorandum assigning roles and responsibilities for identifying and pro- tecting unclassified CTI.


Also within ASA(ALT), the Army Defense Industrial Base Cyber Secu- rity Office (DIBCSO) is responsible for coordinating the proactive protection of Army CTI through the JAPEC. Each year, ASA(ALT) develops a critical pro- grams and technologies (CP&T) list to facilitate this process. Te list prioritizes key Army programs and technologies


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168