There are security weaknesses at many of the research facilities operated by the Department of Defense, according to a DoD Inspector General survey issued last year.
“All [military] Services identified compliance issues related to information assurance,” the IG report (pdf) found, based on a review of 37 out of 121 research, development, test and evaluations facilities.
“Classification marking requirements remain a problem at Army laboratories. The most common issues are a lack of declassification instructions, as well as failures to mark classified folders, media, and working papers properly…. The use of portable electronic devices in areas where classified information is discussed continues to be a problem for one-third of the Army laboratories inspected.”
On the plus side, “the Army clearly has made great strides during the past year by strengthening biological surety policy… especially in the areas of inventory management and accountability.” See “Summary Report of FY2009 Inspections on Security, Technology Protection, and Counterintelligence Practices at DoD Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation Facilities” (redacted), DoD Inspector General Report 10-INTEL-06, May 21, 2010.
The human cost is measured in deaths. The financial cost is measured in the $52 billion taxpayers pay annually end stage renal disease – double NASA’s budget.
Gilman Louie, Longest Serving Board Chair of the Federation of American Scientists, Named Chair Emeritus
The proposed Office will resurrect the long-closed Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), the archive of which has been maintained by FAS for decades at https://ota.fas.org/.
If Congress needs help understanding the risks and rewards of a piece of technology, they shouldn’t have to rely solely on the sparknotes from a salesman. The rub is much simpler: Congress needs nerds.