dfarssurvey

8/4/2019 DFARSSurvey

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dfarssurvey 1/8

September 2011

White Paper:Proposed Changes to DFARSto enhance Cyber Security of

DoD Info

CTOlabs.com

Inside:

• Background on proposed changes

• Survey Results

• Trends of note

A White Paper providing context on proposed rule changes



CTOlabs.com

The Community Weighs In On Proposed DFARS ChangesDoD has proposed changes to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to

help enhance security of DoD information in use at contractor facilities. This report provides context

on those changes including insights from a recent survey of the federal IT community.

Executive Summary

Respondents to a recent survey of members of the federal IT community provides useful context onthe proposed DFARS changes. It was interesting to note, however, that few believe the government is

best at protecting information.

Survey Background

In July, CTOvision.com created and distributed a survey on the new proposed Defense Federal

Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to safeguard unclassied Department of Defense

information on contractor networks. After receiving responses from government, industry, andacademia, we’ve summarized feelings and expectations towards the policy below. Of the respondents,

73% said that they were familiar with DFARS, so we believe we hit a good community with our

survey. Additionally, about a third of the respondents reported that they were security executives,

and another third said they were practitioners. It is good having inputs from both those groupings. A

quarter of respondents were in government and three fourths came from industry and academia.

Summary of the proposed DFARS changes:

Draft changes to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement were proposed after the

recent string of high prole cyber attacks on defense contractors. Information on Department of

Defense networks is protected by DIACAP standards but as of now, protecting information on private

networks is left up to the company’s discretion. Yet since so much of the government’s information

storage and R & D is performed by private corporations, DFARS has been put forward in an attempt to

1



A White Paper For The Federal IT Community

standardize protection and reporting for contractor networks and systems. Aside from an extensive listof reporting requirements, the following three policies are at the heart of DFARS:

a) The Government and its contractors and subcontractors will provide adequate security to safeguard

unclassied DoD information on their unclassied information systems from unauthorized access and

disclosure.

b) Contractors must report to the Government certain cyber incidents that aect unclassied DoD

information resident on or transiting contractor unclassied information systems. Detailed reporting

criteria and requirements are set forth in the clause at 252.204-70YY.

c) A cyber incident that is properly reported by the contractor shall not, by itself, be interpreted

as evidence that the contractor has failed to provide adequate information safeguards for DoD

unclassied information, or has otherwise failed to meet the requirements of the clause at 252.204-

70YY. Contracting ocers shall consult with a functional manager to assess contract performance.

A cyber incident will be evaluated in context, and such events may occur even in cases when it is

determined that adequate safeguards are being used in view of the nature and sensitivity of the DoD

unclassied information and the anticipated threats.

Views of Respondents from Government

Public sector respondents believed in extending regulation to private industry. 75% answered that

government regulations such as FISMA, OMB’s M-11-11, NISTIC , and FICAM should apply to all

contractors if they hope to work with the government, while 25% felt that companies could secure

their data on their own.

Most, however, did not believe that the public sector was better at protecting information. 46% of

respondents believed that government was better than industry at protecting information systems,54% thought it was not, and numerous wrote in that it depends on which industry, company, or

agency, and on which aspect of protection from what threat.

Of government respondents, 83% worked for organizations with policies in place for encryption of

data for storage and transmission, network protection and intrusion detection, and cyber intrusion

reporting based on NIST Special Pub 800-53 “Recommended Security Controls for Federal Information

2



CTOlabs.com

3

Systems and Organizations” while only 7% said they did not and 10% did not know.

To make DFARS better, the most prevalent suggestion was to get more specic. There were concerns

over the government having too broad an inuence in contractor systems, overlaps and confusion

in rules, departments, and agencies, and insuciently explicit requirements. Another repeated

suggestion was to mandate red team exercises to test the vulnerability of systems.

Views of Respondents from the Private Sector:

In the private sector, faith in government control and regulation was much lower. Only 24% thought

the government was better than industry at protecting information, and even then there were heavy

reservations with comments such as “both are awful” and numerous responses that it depends on

which industry, which government agency, and what data.

Two thirds of respondents feared that their costs would go up if DFARS were to be implemented.

At the same time, only 42% felt that adhering to these rules would make their organization or

government data any more secure, as opposed to 58% that did not. Reasons given include that some

corporations already exceed DFARS standards and that regulations do little to improve fundamental

problems of security on the internet such as attribution.

Suggesting ways to make DFARS better, industry respondents also cited making denitions and

requirements more precise and clarifying terms like “adequate” just as government respondents did.

Private sector respondents also expressed concern for smaller contractors, who may have diculty

implementing the recommendations and “go broke trying to comply.”

Overall Trends

Both government and industry respondents were concerned about the fuzzy language of DFARS

and ambiguity in its implementation. Public sector respondents were much more condent in the

government’s ability to keep information secure than private sector though both thought it could be




improved, raising questions on whether government should dictate security measures to industry.While most respondents thought DFARS was generally a good set of guidelines, there were doubts

over the cost and implementation.

To those that took our survey, thanks! Your inputs will do more than just contribute to this post. We are

also providing comments into the formal DFARS process in the hopes of helping government decision-

makers think through the right approach.

4



CTOlabs.com

5

More Reading

For more federal cybersecurity technology and policy issues visit:

CTOvision.com- an blog for enterprise technologists with a special focus on Big Data.

CTOlabs.com - the respository for our research and reporting on all IT issues.

Fedcyber.com - tracking all important federal cybersecurity issues.




About the AuthorAlexander Olesker is a technology research analyst at Crucial Point LLC,

focusing on disruptive technologies of interest to enterprise technologists.

He writes at http://ctovision.com.

Alex is a graduate of the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at

Georgetown University with a degree in Science, Technology, and

International Aairs. He researches and writes on developments in

technology and government best practices for CTOvision.com and

CTOlabs.com, and has written numerous whitepapers on these subjects.

Alex has worked or interned in early childhood education, private

intelligence, law enforcement, and academia, contributing to numerous publications on technology,

international aairs, and security and has lectured at Georgetown and in the Netherlands. Alex is

also the founder and primary contributor of an international security blog that has been quoted and

featured by numerous pundits and the War Studies blog of King’s College, London. Alex is a uent

Russian speaker and procient in French.

Contact Alex at [email protected]

6



CTOlabs.com

For More Information

If you have questions or would like to discuss this report, please contact me. As an advocate for better

IT in government, I am committed to keeping the dialogue open on technologies, processes and best

practices that will keep us moving forward.

Contact:Bob Gourley

[email protected]

703-994-0549

All information/data ©2011 CTOLabs.com.

dfarssurvey

Documents