The General Services Administration (GSA), in conjunction
with the Department of Defense (DOD) published a request for information (RFI)
in Monday’s Federal Register (78 FR 27966-27968)
concerning the “feasibility,
security benefits, and relative merits of incorporating security standards into
acquisition planning and contract administration and address what steps can be
taken to harmonize, and make consistent, existing procurement requirements
related to cybersecurity”.
JWGICRA
The RFI announces the formation of the Joint Working Group
on Improving Cybersecurity and Resilience through Acquisition (JWGICRA). The
working group, under the leadership of the GSA, consists of members selected
from the DoD, GSA, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Office of
Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP), and the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST).
The JWGICRA was formed to fulfill the 120-day reporting
requirement of §8(e)
of the President’s cybersecurity executive order (EO 13636). That report is
supposed to address the “feasibility, security benefits, and relative merits of
incorporating security standards into acquisition planning and contract
administration”.
Definition of ‘Cybersecurity’
The RFI notes that the lack of a common lexicon is a
“ is one of the critical gaps in harmonizing federal acquisition
requirements related to cybersecurity”. For the purposes of this notice GSA is
using the following definition
of cybersecurity:
“(T)he term “cybersecurity” is
given a broad meaning that includes information security and related areas,
like supply chain risk management, information assurance, and software
assurance, as well as other efforts to address threats or vulnerabilities
flowing from or enabled by connection to digital infrastructure.”
Given this definition it is clear that industrial control systems
(ICS) are included, but mainly as an afterthought.
Information Requested
This GSA RFI is looking for answers to a number of questions
in a number of general categories. Those categories include:
• The feasibility of incorporating
cybersecurity standards into federal acquisitions;
• Information about commercial procurement
practices related to cybersecurity; and
• Information about any conflicts
in statutes, regulations, policies, practices, contractual terms and
conditions, or acquisition processes affecting federal acquisition
requirements related to cybersecurity.
Public Comments
The GSA, on behalf of the JWGICRA, is soliciting public
input in this RFI. Comments may be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal
(www.Regulations.gov; Docket # Notice-OERR-2013).
Comments must be submitted by June 12, 2013.
Commentary
This is a very late solicitation of information. The
government has used up 90-days of the 120-day reporting limit working out the
details of how the JWGICRA is going to operate. The NIST
RFI was published within days of the President’s EO; they only had
themselves to work with. The NTA-NIST
RFI was almost a month in the making, they both worked for the Secretary of
Commerce. Here the GSA was supposed to coordinate actions of the
representatives of DOD and DHS in the area of acquisitions. I’m surprised that
this was done as soon as it was.
The deadline for submitting comments is the same day that
the GSA report is due to the President. Either the GSA is going to be late,
ignore the public inputs solicited in this RFA, or is going to have a super
human team of bureaucrats read, correlate, digest, compile and prepare a report
in less than 24 hours.
I will prophesize that the report will be late and the
President won’t even notice. I will assume that the public inputs will be
generally ignored. And I will flatly state that making the time limit is
bureaucratically impossible. Of course, I was saying this well before the EO
was even published.
1 comment:
Hi Patrick - First, from a fellow vet, thanks for your service.
Also, thanks for posting on the important topic of #cybersecurity and the GSA-DOD RFI.
While I generally agree with you on the matter of timing, I will tamp down my cynicism momentarily and instead emphasize that I appreciate the opportunity for stakeholders to engage.
There are many times when this opportunity is not even provided.
Post a Comment