Documents in the NTIS Technical Reports collection are the results of federally funded research. They are directly submitted to or collected by NTIS from Federal agencies for permanent accessibility to industry, academia and the public.  Before purchasing from NTIS, you may want to check for free access from (1) the issuing organization's website; (2) the U.S. Government Printing Office's Federal Digital System website; (3) the federal government Internet portal; or (4) a web search conducted using a commercial search engine such as
Accession Number ADA562314
Title War Fighting in Cyberspace: Evolving Force Presentation and Command and Control.
Publication Date 2011
Media Count 12p
Personal Author M. B. Birdwell R. Mills
Abstract The Department of Defense (DOD) is endeavoring to define war fighting in the global cyberspace domain.1 Creation of US Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM), a subunified functional combatant command (FCC) under US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM), is a huge step in integrating and coordinating the defense, protection, and operation of DOD networks; however, this step does not mean that USCYBERCOM will perform or manage all cyberspace functions. In fact the vast majority of cyberspace functions conducted by the services and combatant commands (COCOM), although vital for maintaining access to the domain in support of their operations, are not of an active war-fighting nature. We apply the concepts of war fighting, offense, and active defense to the domain of cyberspace and propose several recommendations to aid USCYBERCOM as it works with the services and geographic combatant commands (GCC) to fight in cyberspace. That global, regional, and service commanders will have to share command and control (C2) of cyberspace war-fighting capabilities and forces raises several interesting questions about how USCYBERCOM can most effectively work with the GCCs. Specifically, what is the ideal force presentation method, and which C2 model should the DOD use for war-fighting capabilities in cyberspace. Are there lessons learned from similar global-to-regional support challenges that we might apply to cyberspace C2. We offer US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) as a model for cyberspace force presentation and C2; however, this model is a long-term goal that is not immediately achievable. In the interim, USCYBERCOM can adapt lessons learned from space and air-mobility force presentation and C2 to develop a building-block approach to evolve cyber force presentation and C2 from its current nascent state to a more mature USSOCOM- like state.
Keywords Access
Active defense
Air space
Command and control systems
Defense systems
Department of defense
Lessons learned
Space environments
Special operations forces

Source Agency Non Paid ADAS
NTIS Subject Category 62 - Computers, Control & Information Theory
45C - Common Carrier & Satellite
Corporate Author Air Univ., Maxwell AFB, AL. Air Force Research Inst.
Document Type Journal article
Title Note Journal article.
NTIS Issue Number 1225
Contract Number N/A

Science and Technology Highlights

See a sampling of the latest scientific, technical and engineering information from NTIS in the NTIS Technical Reports Newsletter

Acrobat Reader Mobile    Acrobat Reader