Search:  

 Blog     e-Newsletter       Resource Library      Directories      Webinars
AFCEA logo
 

signalarticles

Multiple Army Networks Merging

October 1, 2013
By Henry S. Kenyon

The Army wants to converge its multiple networks into a single architecture that offers the potential to reduce complexity and lead to more efficient battlefield communications. An upcoming exercise focuses on advancing this initiative with the ultimate goal of collapsing the service's many small and mid-sized networks into one.

Over the years, the Army has developed a variety of networks to support communications and command and control, explains Col. Mark Elliott, USA, director of the Army’s LandWarNet Mission Command. For example, Army intelligence and logistics forces operate their own networks to meet their specific mission needs. “All of these networks have grown up over time.”

The Network Integration Evaluation (NIE) exercise scheduled to take place in Fort Bliss, Texas, October 22 through November 11, will begin this data transport convergence process in a controlled environment. The first phase, which kicks off in the upcoming NIE 14.1, will collapse Army intelligence networks into the service’s communications infrastructure and work out the details and issues as they arise, he explains.

Col. Elliott is sanguine about the Army’s prospects for successfully merging its various networks because by working through the NIE, there is no need to push the process unnecessarily. “You don’t have to rush to failure,” he says. During the NIE, the Army will set up the various operational networks needed to support a deployed force, such as its intelligence capabilities. The service will examine how intelligence traffic can be moved onto the broader Army network, and then it will take metrics and make adjustments to make the process work smoothly. The Army has extensive intelligence systems with many specific mission requirements, so it will take time to determine if all or only some of those functions can be moved to the broader service network, he says.

New Cryptographic Device Destined for Drones

October 1, 2013
By George I. Seffers

U.S. Navy researchers are developing a state-of-the-art encryption device for integration onto KC-130 tankers and unmanned aerial systems. An existing version of the device is being installed onto B-52 bombers, E-4s, which serve as airborne command centers for the U.S. president and other National Command Authority officials, and E-6s, which are command and control centers for nuclear weapons. The encryption system can be integrated into virtually any platform and offers backward-compatible, software-definable algorithms that can be updated during operations without downtime.

It is that ability to load algorithms without downtime that researchers tout as one of the biggest benefits of the new system. “This is critical for the ability of the warfighter to be able to replace algorithms as they become obsolete. You don’t have to take a platform offline like almost every other crypto out there now,” says Stanley Chincheck, director, Center for High Assurance Computer Systems, Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), Washington, D.C. “You can do that while it is up and running. That is a unique feature that many crypto devices just don’t have.”

Chincheck cannot reveal a lot of details because of security concerns, but KC-130s and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) will receive the next incarnation of the Programmable Embeddable INFOSEC (Information Security) Product (PEIP, pronounced peep). The version under development is known as PEIP III. The other aircraft—B-52s, E-4s and E-6s—are receiving the current version, PEIP II.

Getting From “We Should” to “I Will”

October 1, 2013
By Lt. Ben Kohlmann, USN

Listen to many senior leaders in both the civilian and military sectors today, and it becomes apparent that there is no shortage of good ideas. Indeed, with austerity and sequestration the new reality, the lack of funds requires creativity. However, far too many fail to take personal responsibility by citing a vague “we should” mantra instead of the more powerful—and personally accountable—“I will.”

I recently had the chance to visit with a woman who attended the International 11.5 Davos Conference. At this gathering of the world’s luminaries, she somehow had made her way into the front row of the proceedings, from where she watched high-ranking government officials from around the world wax eloquent about solving global problems: “We should fix poverty by doing… ,” and so forth. Fed up with the use of this term, she got hold of a microphone during the question-and-answer session and simply said, “I’d really like to see the conversation move from one of ‘we should’ to one of ‘I will’ if you are truly serious about this.”

The crowd was stunned, and silence met her observation from the dais. This, however, was short-lived. The speakers recognized the importance of her words, and the conference took on a new tone following her request.

On a much smaller scale, this mantra has infused many of my peers in the junior ranks. They hear senior leaders asking for solutions, and they take it upon themselves to execute real change. A close friend of mine once said, “Execution is the new innovation,” and I believe this is a profound statement. Good ideas are a dime a dozen, but what sets the doers apart from dreamers are those who actually are able to push an idea through to reality despite the obstacles.

Exploring the
 Outer Edge of
 Space Technology

October 1, 2013
By Rita Boland

NASA’s core culture is to push the boundaries of what has been to create what can be. And within this cutting-edge organization is an entire group dedicated solely to ensuring that the revolutions continue to expand. The Game Changing Development Program exists to find the disruptive technologies available in relevant fields, then move them into the proper channels for development and deployment.

Stephen Gaddis, director of the program, describes its straightforward mission saying, “We are looking for the game changers. We either transform or disrupt the way that the country, that the agency, is doing business in space. We want to have a high impact on new missions and new capabilities. In essence, we’re looking to change the way NASA does business.”

The group has even defined what they mean by the term. Gaddis explains that most people have the right philosophy to understand a game changer, but his program explicitly explains one as an orders-of-magnitude improvement over current resources. “It’s not just incremental, not just evolutionary,” he adds. “It’s revolutionary.” The work involves both creating new technologies as well as changing how processes are followed or products are made.
 

Ask the Expert: The Current Cybersecurity Work Force

October 1, 2013
By Dr. Ernest McDuffie

This is an important question for a number of reasons. Popular media often talk about the growing shortage of skilled cybersecurity workers needed to fill critical open positions both in government and the private sector. This is true, but employers need specific details on the work force so they can make informed decisions about whom to hire and potential employees need to know what to study to position themselves to be hired. The problems of a lack of common language and terms, a complex new field and the ever-changing technology that enables much of cybersecurity combine to make analysis of this work force particularly difficult.

For the past few years, the federal government, by way of its National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE), has been hard at work on these and many other issues related to cybersecurity education, training, awareness and work force development. A major achievement of NICE has been the creation of the National Cybersecurity Workforce Framework (NCWF). This document was developed to provide a common understanding of and lexicon for cybersecurity work. Defining the cybersecurity population consistently using standardized terms is an essential step in ensuring that our country is able to educate, recruit, train, develop and retain a highly qualified work force.

In designing the framework, “Categories” and “Specialty Areas” were used as organizational constructs to group similar types of work. The categories, serving as an overarching structure for the framework, group related specialty areas together. Within each specialty area, typical tasks and knowledge, skills and abilities are provided. In essence, specialty areas in a given category typically are more similar to one another than to specialty areas in other categories.

China in Space

October 1, 2013
By Rita Boland

China’s activities in space have caught the attention of U.S. and other countries’ officials, altering how personnel must consider the domain. The importance of the area outside of Earth to military operations makes the location critical for any nation looking to put itself into a terrestrial position of power. During 2012, China conducted 18 space launches and upgraded various constellations for purposes such as communications and navigation. China’s recent expansion into the realm presents new concerns for civilian programs and defense assets there.

In the U.S. National Military Strategy, officials discuss their concern about China’s military modernization and assertiveness in space, also stating that the “enabling and warfighting domains of space and cyberspace are simultaneously more critical for our operations yet more vulnerable to malicious actions.” The United States has released several pieces of guidance on its approach to the domain such as the National Space Policy and the Defense Department’s National Security Space Strategy. The military defines the latter as a “pragmatic approach to maintain the advantages derived from space while confronting the challenges of an evolving space strategic environment. It is the first such strategy jointly signed by the Secretary of Defense and Director of National Intelligence.”
 

Unlike the 1960s-era space race when Soviets and Americans competed to be first, China approaches space with a different set of goals. Dean Cheng, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation who focuses on Chinese political and social affairs, explains that the Sino perspective asks, “What do we want to do in space? What can space do for us?”

Updated Doctrine 
Addresses Contested Space Operations

October 1, 2013
By George I. Seffers

The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff have updated doctrine for future warfighters to realign space situational awareness as the fifth mission area and to offer direction on operating in a contested or degraded space environment. The updated document will guide combatant commanders and other warfighters for years to come, influencing training, mission planning and global operations.

The importance of space operations is increasing because of the enabling capabilities provided to the joint force. Space-based enabling technologies are now vital to overall military mission accomplishment and provide advantages needed for success in all joint operations. Space assets provide a range of services, including global communications; positioning, navigation and timing; environmental monitoring; and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. Furthermore, space forces simultaneously support multiple users, which requires extensive coordination, planning and early identification of requirements and capabilities.

The Joint Chiefs update the various doctrinal documents roughly every two or three years. The space doctrine, Joint Publication 3-14 (JP 3-14), governs the activities and performance of the U.S. armed forces in joint operations and provides the doctrinal basis for interagency coordination and for U.S. military involvement in multinational operations. It also provides military guidance for the exercise of authority by combatant commanders and other joint force commanders and prescribes joint policy for operations, education and training. Additionally, JP 3-14 guides military leaders in planning operations.

Is Big Data the Way 
Ahead for Intelligence?

October 1, 2013

Another Overhyped Fad

By Mark M. Lowenthal

Director of National Intelligence Lt. Gen. James R. Clapper, USAF (Ret.), once observed that one of the peculiar behaviors of the intelligence community is to erect totem poles to the latest fad, dance around them until exhaustion sets in, and then congratulate oneself on a job well done.

One of our more recent totem poles is big data. Big data is a byproduct of the wired world we now inhabit. The ability to amass and manipulate large amounts of data on computers offers, to some, tantalizing possibilities for analysis and forecasting that did not exist before. A great deal of discussion about big data has taken place, which in essence means the possibility of gaining new insights and connections from the reams of new data created every day.

Or does it?

Read the complete perspective

A Longtime Tool of the Community

By Lewis Shepherd

What do modern intelligence agencies run on? They are internal combustion engines burning pipelines of data, and the more fuel they burn the better their mileage. Analysts and decision makers are the drivers of these vast engines; but to keep them from hoofing it, we need big data.

The intelligence community necessarily has been a pioneer in big data since inception, as both were conceived during the decade after World War II. The intelligence community and big data science always have been intertwined because of their shared goal: producing and refining information describing the world around us, for important and utilitarian purposes.

Read the complete perspective

Understanding 
the Written 
Foreign Language

October 1, 2013
By Robert K. Ackerman

A transliteration tool developed jointly by the intelligence community and a commercial firm is helping eliminate the problem of misidentified foreign names and places in databases. These types of errors can allow a potential terrorist or plot to slip though security if analysts cannot identify common proper nouns and establish valuable links.

The new system helps avoid this problem of misidentification arising from different interpretive spellings of names from a language that does not use Western-style Roman lettering. This problem has become an issue when terrorists’ names are not matched in different databases because their spelling is interpreted differently. Analysts are not able to put together the pieces in a puzzle to develop an accurate picture that shows a potential threat.
 

Information Sharing Takes on New Shape

October 1, 2013
By Henry S. Kenyon

U.S. intelligence agencies soon will be able to share information with each other in a single common computing environment. This effort will increase intra-agency cooperation and efficiency while cutting information technology operating costs through the use of shared services.

The Intelligence Community Information Technology Enterprise (ICITE) is part of a broad strategy led by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and supported by the chief information officers (CIOs) of the five major intelligence agencies. ICITE replaces the old agency-based information technology model with one using a common architecture operating as a single enterprise across the intelligence community.

Launched in 2012, ICITE is not a formal program of record but a development effort directed by the ODNI and agency CIOs. ICITE has five major goals: create a single, standards-based interoperable enterprise architecture for the intelligence community; provide seamless and secure collaboration tools for person-to-person and data-to-data information sharing; establish a standardized, consolidated business process to support agency missions; set up a governance and oversight process; and create partnerships in the intelligence community, across the U.S. government, international partners and industry.

Pages

Subscribe to signalarticles