Enable breadcrumbs token at /includes/pageheader.html.twig

On Point: Q&A With Tarrazzia Martin

Tarrazzia Martin is a senior advisor and technology executive with more than 20 years of experience leading digital transformation across multiple federal agencies, including homeland security and intelligence community mission environments. She specializes in enterprise technology strategy, cybersecurity, organizational change and the modernization of complex government systems. She also serves on AFCEA International’s Cyber and Small Business Committees, supporting national efforts in innovation and workforce advancement.

Tarrazzia Martin discusses Web 3.0, ChatGPT and zero trust with SIGNAL Media. Credit: Alexander-stock.adobe.com

What challenges and opportunities does Web 3.0 offer to government?
Web 3.0 introduces new possibilities for government, especially around trust, data integrity and digital service delivery. Concepts such as decentralized identity, verifiable credentials and distributed audit mechanisms may strengthen how institutions manage provenance and accountability.

Blockchain is increasingly being explored not as a disruptive financial instrument, but as a supporting capability for administrative modernization—improving traceability, strengthening records integrity and enabling more transparent workflows. In some federal contexts, these approaches are being evaluated alongside automation and shared services, including tools like robotic process automation, to improve operational efficiency and governance.

The deeper opportunity is not the technology itself, but what it forces us to confront: trust in government systems is ultimately sustained through policy, oversight and culture—not platforms alone.

You posted on LinkedIn that teams using ChatGPT-style tools expand their attack surface and will increasingly need to prove they’ve governed it. Can you explain?
Generative AI [artificial intelligence] expands the attack surface because it introduces a new interface between people, data and decision-making. The risk is often less about the model itself and more about human interaction—what information is shared, what outputs are trusted and what governance boundaries are missing?

Organizations are increasingly expected to demonstrate strong controls around data protection, access enforcement, auditability and responsible use—similar to how we govern cloud adoption.

This is fundamentally a cultural shift. Secure AI adoption depends on norms, accountability, training and disciplined governance. Technology may evolve quickly, but organizational behavior determines outcomes.

According to Anthropic, Chinese hackers can now use AI almost exclusively to launch cyber campaigns against U.S. networks. What are solutions?
The solutions remain grounded in fundamentals: strong identity controls, phishing-resistant authentication, continuous monitoring and zero-trust enforcement. What changes is the urgency for governance frameworks that keep pace with automation.

The long-term shift is human-centered. AI forces institutions to rethink trust, validation of information and security culture as drivers of resilience.

What recent government actions do you think will most affect the cyber arena?
Recent federal actions have moved cybersecurity toward measurable accountability. The Office of Management and Budget’s Federal Zero Trust Strategy has accelerated the shift away from perimeter-based defense toward identity-centered, continuous risk management.

At the same time, momentum around AI governance reflects a broader evolution: cybersecurity is no longer only about tools, but about institutional responsibility for how information is governed, shared and protected.

The most significant impact is cultural—cybersecurity is becoming an operational expectation embedded into how agencies behave and collaborate.

What are the benefits of serving on AFCEA committees?
Serving on AFCEA committees provides a trusted forum where government, industry and academic leaders collaborate on shared mission challenges—particularly in cybersecurity, identity and emerging technology governance.

What makes the experience especially valuable is the ability to bring lessons learned from different organizations, missions and operational environments into a shared space where we can learn from one another. That exchange of perspectives—what worked, what did not and why—helps organizations mature faster and avoid repeating the same challenges in isolation.

AFCEA provides a structured framework for that kind of knowledge-sharing and collaboration. It enables practitioners to exchange expertise responsibly, build relationships across sectors and translate insight into meaningful, mission-driven change. Ultimately, it reinforces that progress is accelerated when we invest not just in technology, but in people, trust and collective learning.