February 03, 2021

The Cyber Maritime Environment: A Shared Critical Infrastructure and Trump's Maritime Cyber Security Plan

By Nina Kollars, Sam Tangredi and Chris Demchak

Last month, the unclassified version of the Donald Trump administration’s Maritime Cybersecurity Plan was published to the White House website … and then summarily taken down, apparently relegated to the trash bin marked “last president’s stuff.”

The plan was roughly 36 pages of mostly overly broad declarations about the insecurity of the seas; the reliance on, and therefore vulnerability of the United States to, maritime hijinks; and a thinly veiled warning about Chinese competitors and port technology. The document is officially dead letter mail, but here is why Washington cannot afford to let the plan’s points of emphasis sink obscurely into the murky ponds of Mar-a-Lago. Whether in competition or in war, the United States is a maritime country. Land security fails without sea supply defense.

The Maritime Cybersecurity Plan provides a basis upon which the Biden administration can build a whole-of-nation defense in a digitalized environment.

The Maritime Cybersecurity Plan provides a basis upon which the Biden administration can build a whole-of-nation defense in a digitalized environment. Yes, it has broad declarations that declare anew work that has long already been in motion for years like “develop risk modeling to inform maritime cybersecurity standards and best practices.” (Hint: It will look a great deal like the current National Institute of Standards and Technology Cybersecurity framework heavily informed by the excellent ongoing and rarely recognized work of the Coast Guard). The work is ongoing but, without the much needed urgency generated by public and policymaker pressure momentum will be lost. The gap between what engineers and maritime transportation experts know and what the policymaker and the public perceives as a cyber threat is a veritable ocean. The intent of the plan was to fire the starting gun for action in a field nearly entirely ignored by most non-maritime techies and policymakers.

Read the full article from War on the Rocks.

  • Commentary
    • Foreign Affairs
    • December 1, 2021
    Who’s to Blame for Asia’s Arms Race?

    As Beijing has grown stronger, it has also become increasingly belligerent....

    By Tom Shugart

  • Commentary
    • Breaking Defense
    • November 18, 2021
    For JADC2 to Have a Chance, DoD Needs to Get Serious About Data Standards

    We are past the tipping point where information and decision-centric capabilities are more important instruments of war than kinetic weapons....

    By Robert O. Work & Billy Fabian

  • Commentary
    • Foreign Affairs
    • November 17, 2021
    The U.S. Military and the Coming Great-Power Challenge

    Simply put, China and Russia had no interest in joining a U.S.-led international order. They had long rejected it. They had only lacked the means to openly contest it....

    By Dr. Andrew Krepinevich, Jr.

  • Commentary
    • November 10, 2021
    Sharper: Global Posture

    The Department of Defense is finalizing the first global posture review of the Biden administration, an assessment of the U.S. military's global footprint. What will the admin...

    By Anna Pederson

View All Reports View All Articles & Multimedia