Department of Defense Archives - A Cyber Fellow
Currently viewing the tag: "Department of Defense"

Download (PDF, 795KB)

Released in December of 2011 by the Executive Office of the President, the National Science and Technology Council provides direction in Trustworthy Cyberspace: Strategic Plan for the Federal Cybersecurity Research and Development Program.  I find understanding this document helps clarify how the “Technology Doctrine” flows down through the government into the Department of Defense and then into the U.S. Navy.

The objective of  Trustworthy Cyberspace: Strategic Plan for the Federal Cybersecurity Research and Development Program is “to express a vision for the research necessary to develop game-changing technologies that can neutralize the attacks on the cyber systems of today and lay the foundation for a scientific approach that better prepares the field to meet the challenges of securing the cyber systems of tomorrow.

Federal Cybersecurity Research and Development (R&D) Program Thrusts:

  1. Inducing Change
    • Designed-In Security
    • Tailored Trustworthy Spaces (with a Focus Area  of Wireless Mobile Networks)
    • Moving Target (with Focus Areas of Deep Understanding of Cyberspace and Nature-Inspired Solutions)
    • Cyber Economic Incentives – Research required to Explore models of cybersecurity investment and markets; develop data models, ontologies, and automatic means of sanitizing data or making data anonymous; define meaningful cybersecurity metrics and actuarial tables; improve the economic viability of assured software development methods; provide methods; to support personal data ownership; provide knowledge in support of laws, regulations, and international agreements.
  2. Developing Scientific Foundations
    • Organizes disparate areas of knowledge – Provides structure and organization to a broad-based body of knowledge in the form of testable models and predictions
    • Enables discovery of universal laws – Produces laws that express an understanding of basic, universal dynamics against which to test problems and formulate explanations
    • Applies the rigor of the scientific method – Approaches problems using a systematic methodology and discipline to formulate hypotheses, design and execute repeatable experiments, and collect and analyze data
  3. Maximizing Research Impact
    • Supporting National Priorities – Health IT, Smart Grid, Financial Services, National Defense, Transportation, Trusted Identities, Cybersecurity Education.
    • Engaging the Cybersecurity Research Community
  4. Accelerating Transition to Practice
    • Technology Discovery
    • Test and Evaluation
    • Transition, Adoption, and Commercialization

Executing the Federal Cybersecurity Research Program:

  1. Research Policies
    • Provide accurate, relevant, timely scientific and technical advice
    • ensure policies of Executive Branch are informed by sound science
    • ensure scientific and technical work of Executive Branch is coordinated to provide greatest benefit to society
  2. Research Coordination

    NITRD Structure for Cybersecurity R&D Coordination

  3. Research Execution (via Agencies)
    • DARPA
    • DHS S&T
    • DoE
    • IARPA
    • NIST
    • NSA
    • NSF
    • OSD
    • DoD Service research organizations

[via NITRD]

Incoming search terms:

federal government role in tailored trustworthy spaces

Download (PDF, 1.13MB)

The foundation of the paper is based upon an “Old Soldier’s” quote:

“Yours is the profession of arms, the will to win, the sure knowledge that in war there is no substitute for victory, that if you lose, the Nation will be destroyed, that the very obsession of your public service must be Duty, Honor, Country.” – General Douglas MacArthur [farewell speech to West Point Cadets in May of 1962]

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, starts out a recent America’s Military – A Profession of Arms White Paper that encourages us to “renew our commitment to the Profession of Arms” to continue to shape Joint Force 2020.

The Key components of the paper are:

  1. Values
  2. The Military Profession 
  3. Trust
  4. Leadership as the Foundation – Strengthening our Profession of Arms
  5. Mission Command
  6. Jointness – Strength from Diversity
  7. The Way Ahead – Advancing the Profession of Arms
I found that the Leadership as the Foundation section reflected my most rewarding experiences.  The necessity to build and maintain trust while inspiring others to achieve has always been the most rewarding for me personally.  This requires of the leader the ability to be an “expert at becoming an expert.”  I’ve found that the ability to learn and understand something faster than another individual allows me to lead and mentor others with more confidence and greater results.
The Way Ahead: Proficient in combat, security, engagement, relief and reconstruction.  Remain Responsive and Resilient!  Semper Gumby!
[via JCS]

Incoming search terms:

admiral arleigh burke said that command by negation was important because, Admiral Arleigh Burke said that command by negation, Yours is the profession of arms the will to win the sure knowledge that in war there is no substitute for victory that if you lose the Nation will be destroyed that the very obsession of your public service must be duty honor country, yours is the professions of arms the will to win the sure, dempsey profession of arms, command by negation was important because, profession of arms whitepaper GEN Dempsey, the profession of arms dempsey white paper, yours is the profession of arms, Arleigh Burke said that command by negation was important because, ours is the profession of arms

Download (PDF, 25KB)

 

Rand Corporation LogoThe RAND Corporation has an excellent summary of the U.S. Government-Wide and Department of Defense (DoD) Definitions of Research and Development (R&D).  This helps show the differences between the full government’s view and the DoD specific labeling (6.1, 6.2, 6.3…).  This break down in the definitions of R&D is also referred to as the Government’s “Color of Money” which is simply the variant of Government dollars that a program or project can accept or a funding entity may be able to provide.  This is extremely important to understand when planning the Navy Budget.

To focus specifically on the DoD definitions for DoD Acquisition the definitions are:

  • Basic Research (6.1) – Systematic study directed toward greater knowledge or understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and/or observable facts without specific applications toward processes or products in   mind.
  • Applied Research (6.2) – Systematic study to gain knowledge or understanding necessary to determine the means by which a recognized and specific need may be met.
  • Advanced Technology Development (6.3) – Includes all efforts that have moved into the development and integration of hardware for field experiments and tests.
  • Demonstration and Validation (6.4) – Includes all efforts necessary to evaluate integrated technologies in as realistic an operating environment as possible to assess the performance or cost reduction potential of advanced technology.
  • Engineering and Manufacturing Development (6.5) – Includes those projects in engineering and manufacturing development for Service use but which have not received approval for full rate production.
  • Research and Development Test & Evaluation (RDT&E) Management Support (6.6) – Includes R&D efforts directed toward support of installation or operations required for general R&D use. Included would be test ranges, military construction, maintenance support of laboratories, operations and maintenance of test aircraft and ships, and studies and analyses in support of R&D program.
  • Operational System Development (6.7) – Includes those development projects in support of development acquisition programs or upgrades still in engineering and manufacturing development, but which have received Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) or other approval for production, or for which production funds have been included in the DoD budget submission for the budget or subsequent fiscal year.
  • Developmental Test and Evaluation – Efforts associated with engineering or support activities to determine the acceptability of a system, subsystem, or component.
  • Operational Test and Evaluation – Efforts associated with engineering or support activities to determine the acceptability of a system, subsystem, or component.

[via RAND]

 

 

Incoming search terms:

6 1 6 2 6 3 research definition, color of money government, DOD color of money, 6 1 funding definition, defense colors of money, where does the dod term color of money or colorless money, 6 3 research definition, 6 2 research and development, 6 1 6 2 6 3 research definitions, trl 6 1 6 2, DoD definition of research, DOD definitions of production money