Do you understand how the Navy plans to achieve Information Dominance as conveyed in the U.S. Navy’s Information Dominance Roadmap 2013-2028? Do you understand how the Plan to achieve Information Dominance supports the CNO’s Tenets?
The Roadmap highlights the plan to achieve Information Dominance through:
- Assured Command and Control (C2) - will require a more robust, protected, resilient and reliable information infrastructure that undergirds the Navy’s overall information environment and allow uninterrupted worldwide communication between deployed units and forces ashore. Navy’s information infrastructure must be able to maintain essential network and data link services across secured segments of the electromagnetic spectrum in order to transport, share, store, protect and disseminate critical combat information.
- Battlespace Awareness - will require enhanced information content, advanced means to rapidly sense, collect, process, analyze, evaluate and exploit intelligence regarding our adversaries and the operating environment. Our information content will serve as the basis from which nearly all decisions will be made, enabling our forces to more effectively maneuver and coordinate actions that target and engage enemy forces.
- Integrated Fires - will require new capabilities to fully employ integrated information in warfare by expanding the use of advanced electronic warfare and offensive cyber effects to complement existing and planned air, surface and subsurface kinetic weapons within the battlespace. Future information effects will be designed to impact and change adversary behavior, or when necessary, to control, manipulate, deny, degrade or destroy his warfighting capabilities.
The Navy is pursuing improved information-based capabilities, to achieve Information Dominance, that will enable it to prevail in the higher-threat, information-intensive combat environments of the 21st Century. This document outlines challenges anticipated over the next 15 years in the operating and information environments, and highlights long-term opportunities for fully integrating Navy’s information-related activities, resources, processes and capabilities to optimize warfighting effects and maintain decision superiority across the spectrum of warfare. The Navy’s plans to achieve Information Dominance by: 1) assuring command and control (C2) for our deployed forces regardless of the threat environment; 2) enhancing battlespace awareness to shorten the decision cycle inside that of the adversary and to better understand the maritime operating environment; and, 3) fully integrating traditional kinetic and emerging non-kinetic fires to expand warfighting options to both Navy and Joint commanders. To accomplish these plans, today’s current information-based capabilities involving Assured C2, Battlespace Awareness, and Integrated Fires will require continual changes and improvements in a number of diverse areas.
Are you supporting the plan to achieve Information Dominance? Looking for additional IDC and Navy Strategy documents? Check out Navy Cyber Power 2020 which supports the Navy Strategy for Achieving Information Dominance, additional related supporting documents include: the Navy Information Dominance Roadmap, 2013-2028; the Navy IDC Human Capital Strategy, 2012-2017; the Naval Intelligence Strategy, 2013-2020; and, the 2013 Navy Space Strategy. Within this integrated framework, the Navy begins in earnest the process of marshaling its resources, galvanizing the workforce, and aligning Navy’s Information Dominance capabilities to fully enable the Navy’s primary tenet of Warfighting First.
[via TENTH FLEET]
Incoming search terms:METOC, vadm mike rogers, METOC|ACyberFellow, SpaceCadre|ACyberFellow, US army information dominance roadmap
If you have taken the time to read Imminent Domain by Admiral Jonathan Greenert you understand the priority of the Electromagnetic Spectrum (EMS) and Cyberspace Operations set by the Chief of Naval Operations. The U.S. Navy has recently explored numerous options while conducting a Massive Multiplayer Online Wargame Leveraging the Internet (MMOWGLI) on Electromagnetic Maneuver. What wasn’t focused on was the larger ramifications the U.S. Political system has on the options available to the Navy and Department of Defense (DoD).
The White House plan expands access of the EMS for innovation growth and commercial use; the DoD plan has demonstrated increasing reliance on the EMS. While the DoD supports the “national economic and security goals” of the Nation it is facing another “do more, with less” scenario as massive capability growth depends on dwindling allocations of the EMS. As Mr. Lawrence Lessig points out (at about 8:20) individuals in the U.S. Government (USG) have attempted to deregulate portions of the EMS in recent history. Why did the deregulation attempt fail? Lessig conveys that it was due to the massive and self perpetuating ecosystem created by the current day U.S. Political System.
So the causal argument consists of:
- Navy is unable to support the missions assigned by the DoD which are dependent on the EMS; because
- the DoD is not able to provide adequate ability to leverage enough of the EMS for warfighting; because
- the DoD must comply with the Federal Regulations which govern use of the Nation’s EMS; because
- the EMS is still allocated in an antiquated fashion; because
- the USG is no longer capable of affecting positive change to advance National interests; because
- the National interests are determined by politicians elected within the current political system; because
- the political system cannot be reformed by the politicians who respond to the demands of the voting populous; because
- the voting populous is only able to vote for those that the funders fund; because
- the funders fund only those candidates which support their personal interests.
Interesting isn’t it? I believe Mr. Lessig is on to something; Political Reform is my first priority. What do you think? What is your “first priority?”
TeleGeography’s Submarine Cable Map 2013 shows the massive amount of submerged fiber optic cable which support the global internet architecture. The latest edition depicts 244 cable systems that are active or due to enter service by 2014. From this submarine cable chart it is clear there are still vast portions of the globe that are not afforded the broadband benefits which come with a terrestrial based internet connection.
Combine this information with Akamai’s State of the Internet report and you start to see the planning and investment that true long-haul communication requires, via submarine cables, to affect major improvements in global network connectivity.
The next time your network provider or technical network expert tells you what sounds like an “off the wall” reason for degraded network performance which is interupting your connection to the internet you might want to cut the individual some slack and point them toward the submarine cable map. It might have been caused by some lazy mariner anchoring where they shouldn’t and breaking a submerged cable.
What do you believe is possible if there were deeper and faster internet penetration to the areas without submarine cables?
Incoming search terms:mattcegelske com: submarine, nsa telegeography, nsa telegeography 2013, optic map 2013, submarine, submarine cable technology
Follow A Cyber Fellow on Twitter!
"Graphics Chips Help Process Big Data Sets in Milliseconds" http://t.co/mIxHC0Avfk
"Ship Tracking Hack Makes Tankers Vanish from View" http://t.co/IS29FY5kwU
"MakerBot Thingiverse gets an iOS app for perusing 3D-printing projects on the go" http://t.co/M05RSVlgX0
"Arbour Networks has published ATLAS Q3 2013 DDoS report" http://t.co/8KQ9s6fFSX
"Trend Micro Finds Vulnerabilities in Java, Patched in Latest Oracle Update" http://t.co/a72tozCPZ8
"Universities Schooled By Malware: Higher Ed Networks 300 Percent More Infected" http://t.co/zAUBY18F4x
"Can the Internet of Things make itself secure?" http://t.co/jGcCCDMDya