How DoD can improve its technology resilience

Mark Pomerleau

WASHINGTON — The Department of Defense must bolster its resilience in mission platforms in order to stay ahead of threats, a new think tank report says.

With the military's shift toward great power competition, or conflict against nation states, its systems and platforms will be under greater stress than technological inferior adversaries battled during the counterterrorism fight of the last decade-plus.

Systems and networks are expected to be contested, disrupted and even destroyed, meaning officials need to build redundancy and resilience in from the start to work through such challenges. In fact, top defense officials have been warning for several years that they are engaged in conflict that is taking place below the threshold of armed conflict in which adversaries are probing networks and systems daily for espionage or disruptive purposes.

“Resilience is a key challenge for combat mission systems in the defense community as a result of accumulating technical debt, outdated procurement frameworks, and a recurring failure to prioritize learning over compliance. The result is brittle technology systems and organizations strained to the point of compromising basic mission functions in the face of changing technology and evolving threats,” said a new report out today by the Atlantic Council titled “How Do You Fix a Flying Computer? Seeking Resilience in Software-Intensive Mission Systems.”

“Mission resilience must be a priority area of work for the defense community. Resilience offers a critical pathway to sustain the long-term utility of software-intensive mission systems, while avoiding organizational brittleness in technology use and resulting national security risks. The United States and its allies face an unprecedented defense landscape in the 2020s and beyond.”

This resilience, is built upon three pillars, the authors write: robustness, which is the ability of a system to negate the impact of disruption; responsiveness, which is the ability of a system to provide feedback and incorporate changes on a disruption, and; adaptability, which is the ability to a system to change itself to continue operating despite a disruption.

Systems, the report notes, are more than just the sum of its parts — hardware and software — but rather are much broader to include people, organizational processes and technologies.

To date, DoD has struggled to manage complexity and develop robust and reliable mission systems, even in a relatively benign environment, the report bluntly asserts, citing problems with the F-35′s Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) as one key example.

“A conflict or more contested environment would only exacerbate these issues. The F-35 is not alone in a generation of combat systems so dependent on IT and software that failures in code are as critical as a malfunctioning munition or faulty engine — other examples include Navy ships and military satellites,” the authors write. “To ensure mission systems like the F-35 remain available, capable, and lethal in conflicts to come demands the United States and its allies prioritize the resilience of these systems. Not merely security against compromise, mission resilience is the ability of a mission system to prevent, respond to, and adapt to both anticipated and unanticipated disruptions, to optimize efficacy under uncertainty, and to maximize value over the long term. Adaptability is measured by the capacity to change — not only to modify lines of software code, but to overturn and replace the entire organization and the processes by which it performs the mission, if necessary. Any aspect that an organization cannot or will not change may turn out to be the weakest link, or at least a highly reliable target for an adversary.”

The report offers four principles that defense organizations can undertake to me more resilient in future conflicts against sophisticated adversaries:

Embrace failure: DoD must be more willing to take risks and embrace failure to stay ahead of the curve. Organizations can adopt concepts such as chaos engineering, experimenting on a system to build confidence in its ability to withstand turbulent conditions in production, and planning for loss of confidentiality in compromised systems.
Improve speed: DoD must be faster at adapting and developing, which includes improving its antiquated acquisition policies and adopt agile methodologies of continuous integration and delivery. Of note, DoD has created a software acquisition pathway and is implementing agile methodologies of continuous integration and delivery, though on small scales.
Always be learning: Defense organizations operate in a highly contested cyber environment, the report notes, and as the department grows more complex, how it learns and adapts to rapidly evolving threats grows in importance. Thus, it must embrace experimentation and continuous learning at all levels of systems as a tool to drive improvement.
Manage trade-offs and complexity: DoD should improve mission system programs' understanding of the trade-offs between near-term functionality and long-term complexity to include their impact on systems' resilience.

https://www.c4isrnet.com/cyber/2020/12/14/how-dod-can-improve-its-technology-resilience/

On the same subject

April 2, 2020

Panel wants to double federal spending on AI
Aaron Mehta A congressionally mandated panel of technology experts has issued its first set of recommendations for the government, including doubling the amount of money spent on artificial intelligence outside the defense department and elevating a key Pentagon office to report directly to the Secretary of Defense. Created by the National Defense Authorization Act in 2018, the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence is tasked with reviewing “advances in artificial intelligence, related machine learning developments, and associated technologies,” for the express purpose of addressing “the national and economic security needs of the United States, including economic risk, and any other associated issues.” The commission issued an initial report in November, at the time pledging to slowly roll out its actual policy recommendations over the course of the next year. Today's report represents the first of those conclusions — 43 of them in fact, tied to legislative language that can easily be inserted by Congress during the fiscal year 2021 budget process. Bob Work, the former deputy secretary of defense who is the vice-chairman of the commission, said the report is tied into a broader effort to move DoD away from a focus on large platforms. “What you're seeing is a transformation to a digital enterprise, where everyone is intent on making the DoD more like a software company. Because in the future, algorithmic warfare, relying on AI and AI enabled autonomy, is the thing that will provide us with the greatest military competitive advantage,” he said during a Wednesday call with reporters. Among the key recommendations: The government should “immediately double non-defense AI R&D funding” to $2 billion for FY21, a quick cash infusion which should work to strengthen academic center and national labs working on AI issues. The funding should “increase agency topline levels, not repurpose funds from within existing agency budgets, and be used by agencies to fund new research and initiatives, not to support re-labeled existing efforts.” Work noted that he recommends this R&D to double again in FY22. The commission leaves open the possibility of recommendations for increasing DoD's AI investments as well, but said it wants to study the issue more before making such a request. In FY21, the department requested roughly $800 million in AI developmental funding and another $1.7 billion in AI enabled autonomy, which Work said is the right ratio going forward. “We're really focused on non-defense R&D in this first quarter, because that's where we felt we were falling further behind,” he said. “We expect DoD AI R&D spending also to increase” going forward. The Director of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC) should report directly to the Secretary of Defense, and should continue to be led by a three-star officer or someone with “significant operational experience.” The first head of the JAIC, Lt. Gen. Jack Shanahan, is retiring this summer; currently the JAIC falls under the office of the Chief Information Officer, who in turn reporters to the secretary. Work said the commission views the move as necessary in order to make sure leadership in the department is “driving" investment in AI, given all the competing budgetary requirements. The DoD and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) should establish a steering committee on emerging technology, tri-chaired by the Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Principal Deputy Director of ODNI, in order to “drive action on emerging technologies that otherwise may not be prioritized” across the national security sphere. Government microelectronics programs related to AI should be expanded in order to “develop novel and resilient sources for producing, integrating, assembling, and testing AI-enabling microelectronics.” In addition, the commission calls for articulating a “national for microelectronics and associated infrastructure.” Funding for DARPA's microelectronics program should be increased to $500 million. The commission also recommends the establishment of a $20 million pilot microelectronics program to be run by the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), focused on AI hardware. The establishment of a new office, tentatively called the National Security Point of Contact for AI, and encourage allied government to do the same in order to strengthen coordination at an international level. The first goal for that office would be to develop an assessment of allied AI research and applications, starting with the Five Eyes nations and then expanding to NATO. One issue identified early by the commission is the question of ethical AI. The commission recommends mandatory training on the limits of artificial intelligence in the AI workforce, which should include discussions around ethical issues. The group also calls for the Secretary of Homeland Security and the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to “share their ethical and responsible AI training programs with state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement officials,” and track which jurisdictions take advantage of those programs over a five year period. Missing from the report: any mention of the Pentagon's Directive 3000.09, a 2012 order laying out the rules about how AI can be used on the battlefield. Last year C4ISRNet revealed that there was an ongoing debate among AI leaders, including Work, on whether that directive was still relevant. While not reflected in the recommendations, Eric Schmidt, the former Google executive who chairs the commission, noted that his team is starting to look at how AI can help with the ongoing COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak, saying "“We're in an extraordinary time... we're all looking forward to working hard to help anyway that we can.” The full report can be read here. https://www.c4isrnet.com/artificial-intelligence/2020/04/01/panel-wants-to-double-federal-spending-on-ai/
July 20, 2022

BIND 4.0 | Call for proposal
The BIND 4.0 International Open Call for Startups to apply for the chance to put innovation into action with paid contracts with industry leaders, is now active and accepting applications! Who do we Work With? Young companies worldwide developing solutions that can be applied to the Intelligent Industry, Clean Energy & Sustainability, Health Tech and/or Food Tech sectors for our 65+ Corporate Partners based in the Basque Country, Spain. The technologies of interest are wide ranging and not limited to: AI, Cybersecurity, Big Data Analytics, IOT/IIOT, Smart Energy, AR/VR, Machine or Artificial Vision, Collaborative Robotics, Additive Manufacturing, Biobased Solutions, Clean Tech, New Materials, NanoTech, Medical Devices, Smart Sensors, etc. Why BIND 4.0 Open Innovation & Acceleration Program? It is a government sponsored initiative with 6 years of proven track record accelerating over 160 International Startups and catalyzing countless business opportunities. 45K Average Contract Amount 65+ Big Name Reference Clients High Impact Acceleration, Mentoring & Support Zero Equity Taken & No Fee to Participate Please Share our International Startup Open Call. If you'd like us to prepare something targeted to your newsletter or startup portfolio please let us know. Easily share our latest social media posts and upcoming Webinar events via the links below. Key Details and links: Startup Open Call, Accepting Applications Deadline Sep 8, 2022 BIND 4.0 Webinar Presentation with Alumni July 28, 2022 BIND 4.0 Webinar Presentation with Alumni Aug 30, 2022 BIND 4.0 2022 Program Catalogue 2022 Catalogue BIND 4.0 Website For More Resources www.BIND40.com HTML Email Open Call Announcement Link to Email Message LinkedIn Open Call Post BIND 4.0 2022 Open Call Twitter Open Call Publication BIND 4.0 2022 Open Call We Value Collaborative Partnerships. Remember, for our Collaborative Partners with relevant topics and programs, we offer event promotion via our alumni newsletter or social media, targeted startup referrals, plus networking via invitations to innovation events. Have Any Startup Recommendations? Send us a quick email with any Startups that you think could be a good fit for our immersion, acceleration and open innovation program. Send their contact info so we can reach out to them directly and fast track their application based on your referral. Startups can set up a 1:1 Meeting with us, or if you'd rather send them this Link to Apply, the application deadline is September 8th.
April 24, 2020

Impact of Covid-19 on commercial MRO
Opinion: How COVID-19 Has Already Changed Everything David Marcontell April 17, 2020 Oliver Wyman To say that COVID-19 is having a devastating effect on aviation is an understatement. With hundreds of millions of people living under stay-at-home orders and unemployment rates in the U.S. and Europe rising faster than they ever have, global airline capacity in available seat-miles is down 59% compared to what it was at this time last year. The International Air Transport Association is forecasting airline losses of $252 billion—a tally that has been revised upward twice in the last six weeks. At my own firm, we cut our 2020 forecast for demand in the MRO market by $17-35 billion to reflect the nearly 11,000 aircraft that have been taken out of service and the 50% drop in daily utilization for those that are still flying. Oliver Wyman also lowered its projection for new aircraft deliveries by 50-60% versus 2019 after a comprehensive review of original equipment manufacturer (OEM) build projections versus airline demand. Deliveries for most current-production models are expected to drop 50% or more in 2021 and 2022. As a result, we project that it will be well into 2022 before the global MRO market might return to the size it was before COVID-19. This crisis has gone well past the point of a V-shaped recovery. Lasting damage has been done, and not unlike the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks or the 2008 global financial crisis, the behavior of governments, businesses and the public is likely to have been changed forever. Following 9/11, it took nearly 18 months for passenger traffic to return to its previous level, and when it finally did, travel looked very different than it had before the attacks. Passenger anxiety and the “hassle” factor associated with heightened airport security caused people to stay at home or drive. It took nearly a decade for the public to adjust to the new normal of commercial air travel. In a post-COVID-19 environment, it is not unrealistic to expect new screening protocols to be put in place to help manage the risk of reinfection or an emergence of new hot spots. Already, international public health officials are considering such tools as immunization passports and body temperature scanning (already in use by some airports) that would be applicable to everyone on every flight, much like our security screening is today. In addition, virtual meeting technology—adoption of which is expanding quickly out of necessity—is now becoming business as usual for work and socializing, and it's unlikely we will turn away from it entirely even when the disease is a memory. These combined influences will undoubtedly slow passenger traffic growth. COVID-19 also will change the industry's labor landscape. For the past several years, the aviation industry has been concerned with a looming labor shortage. Before the coronavirus crisis, regional airlines were already being forced to shut down because they couldn't find enough pilots; others were trimming flight schedules. A stunning 90% of the Aeronautical Repair Station Association's 2019 survey reported difficulty finding enough technicians—a situation that cost ARSA members more than $100 million per month in unrealized revenue. COVID-19 will change all that. With the global fleet expected to have 1,200 fewer airplanes flying in 2021 than 2019, the industry will need roughly 18,000 fewer pilots and 8,400 fewer aviation maintenance technicians in 2021. The depth of the cutbacks is the equivalent of grounding 1-2 years' worth of graduates from training and certification programs around the world. How many would-be pilots and mechanics may now be dissuaded from pursuing a career in aviation with those statistics? If people turn away now, when aviation comes back it may be a few years before that candidate pipeline is restored. Another example of permanent change from aviation's last cataclysmic event was the consolidation of the OEM supply chain after the Great Recession. Tier 1 and Tier 2 suppliers went on a buying spree, gobbling up smaller companies. While the post-COVID-19 business environment will undoubtedly be hazardous for these same suppliers, the consolidation of the past decade has put them in a better position to survive this upheaval. Can the same be said for the MRO community, which comprises many smaller, privately held and family-owned companies? I suspect not. While governments are scrambling to provide financial relief for small businesses hurt by the global economic shutdown, these efforts will likely fall short. The result might well be a further consolidated MRO community dominated by the OEMs plus a handful of fully integrated firms that provide support to both OEMs and airlines. COVID-19 is a painful reminder that aviation always will be a cyclical business. With each cycle, the industry renews itself, performing better than before. One should expect this cycle to be no different. The biggest question is: How long will this cycle last? —David Marcontell, Oliver Wyman partner and general manager of its Cavok division, has aftermarket experience with leading OEMs, airlines, MROs and financial services.

All news