Posted on Sep 6, 2017
Air Force cyber could be reorganized in coming months
2.14K
29
19
2
2
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
Meh. It'll be a Band-Aid at best. We need to start moving cyber out of an agency-specific viewpoint. Tech's gone leaps and bounds beyond that mode of thinking.
(3)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
SSgt Ryan Sylvester - would give it a clear CoC & easy integration into operability. And they could have a seat at the table when important defense issues are discussed, instead of possibly being relegated to a back chair in the corner waiting on teacher to call on them when they raise their hand.
(1)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
It is possible to separate the support piece of cyber from the operational and have it operate at the federal government vs the DOD or individual services. OCO and DCO should still remain within the folds of the services. Toward that end, they can also be tasked to do tours within the "Federal enterprise" from a DCO perspective. But the CPTs, NMTs, CSTs, N-CPTs, deploy-able Comm, and the cyber intel capabilities associated with them should all remain military functions.
(2)
(0)
SSgt Ryan Sylvester
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin - There are definitely military-specific capabilities that need to be taken into consideration. Probably the best way to look at it would be to retune military cyber capabilities under one overarching joint command (rather than establishing a separate cyber branch) capable of handling all comms capabilities for all military installations, field personnel trained in specific needs areas (ie, Navy personnel handling shipboard comms, local facility techs, etc), a new federal agency for all federal-level enterprise functions, and orient the two entities appropriately. Military could provide cyberdefense operations across the federal government, since data is an asset that must be appropriately defended and loss of which causes degradation of national security.
The thing I'm looking at mainly is that we need to be moving toward streamlining cyberoperations. Retuning one entity isn't enough. We need to be moving toward full integration, as much as can be operationally allowed. Of course, that's probably just a pipedream.
The thing I'm looking at mainly is that we need to be moving toward streamlining cyberoperations. Retuning one entity isn't enough. We need to be moving toward full integration, as much as can be operationally allowed. Of course, that's probably just a pipedream.
(1)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
Like I was trying to say, the IT support element of cyber operations (care and feeding of the network, maintenance, etc) can and should be centrally managed through a single Federal organization (to which each of the agencies either pony up people or money). The true operational piece like DCO, OCO, and Deployed Comm still requires the services to provide the organize, train, and equip aspects. In the end, they already answer to CyberCOM (which is becoming it's own unified COCOM) and in the case of our National infrastructure, we have Cyber National Mission Force - CNMF (under CyberCOM as well, but beyond the DODIN).
This, in many ways, is already becoming close to how we employ special operations capabilities. Each of the services organizes, trains, and equips their special ops personnel, and SOCOM has OPCON/TACON.
The only problem I see with what some of the services are doing, is refusing to separate the traditional comm personnel from the cyber ones. While they are related, cyber requires a more concentrated, expensive, and committed effort to mature the individuals.
if we keep putting them into the pipeline and then moving them out for traditional comm, we are wasting valuable resources. If we ever create a federal enterprise for each of the domains (NIPR, SIPR, JWICS, and then some), this could become a special duty assignment for them but only for career broadening. In the end there should be an AFSC/MOS for OCO, DCO, deployed comm, and cyber intelligence. Cross training should be available, but similar to how pilots do it (which is uncommon for a fighter pilot to become a bomber pilot).
This, in many ways, is already becoming close to how we employ special operations capabilities. Each of the services organizes, trains, and equips their special ops personnel, and SOCOM has OPCON/TACON.
The only problem I see with what some of the services are doing, is refusing to separate the traditional comm personnel from the cyber ones. While they are related, cyber requires a more concentrated, expensive, and committed effort to mature the individuals.
if we keep putting them into the pipeline and then moving them out for traditional comm, we are wasting valuable resources. If we ever create a federal enterprise for each of the domains (NIPR, SIPR, JWICS, and then some), this could become a special duty assignment for them but only for career broadening. In the end there should be an AFSC/MOS for OCO, DCO, deployed comm, and cyber intelligence. Cross training should be available, but similar to how pilots do it (which is uncommon for a fighter pilot to become a bomber pilot).
(1)
(0)
What is good about this is by putting the 24th and 25th together, we also place the authority of all the network enterprises under one authority as well (i.e. NIPR, SIPR, JWICS). This enables the security aspect to consolidate resources, expertise, services, and even DCO operations together. The intention is also to move the capability under Air Combat Command (again), which I'm on the fence for. The reason for this is because it was tried before (moving cyber under ACC), and cyber consistently missed out on getting prioritized in this pilot world. At least with AFSPC, the dependency of space and communications assets were very close, which help get the funding. It will be interesting to see this happen though and I hope the leadership at ACC gets it when it comes to the importance of cyber operations.
(2)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin thanks for the info, sir! I agree. I think this would best be under Space because of the comms, satellites, etc. It is a natural fit. I think it can grow to encompass a joint unit, and possibly even evolve into its own branch - a 5th domain, if you will?
(1)
(0)
It would make sense but the AF has never shown the ability to pair down its Flag Officers. We are still trying to get rid of the one Star at Willford hall that was supposed to reorganize under SAMC in the last BRAC. The Navy has always been good at executing BRAC (Law) the AF not so much.
(2)
(0)
LCDR (Join to see)
SSgt (Join to see) - And I currently work for both the 24th and 25th they are not about to give up easily. You should have heard what they had to say about the new Space Command and merger of all things Cyber. Then there is the NGA they are real sure of themselves in the cyber war.
(1)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
LCDR (Join to see) - until disaster strikes, they aren't going to realize they need to merge it all & become one big unstoppable monster in the field.
(1)
(0)
LCDR (Join to see)
SSgt (Join to see) - Think all of cyber should merge under one command either Spectrum Warfare or Electromagnetic Maneuver Warfare. A joint command just like SOC with rotating command. All forces should encourage career field Warfighters geographically separated but seamlessly connected through web enable architecture to conduct both offensive and defensive use of the electromagnetic spectrum.
(1)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
LCDR (Join to see) - exactly. It's the domain of the future and is needed, like, yesterday!
(0)
(0)
Read This Next