WEEK# 4 Assignment For this assignment, I will discuss the evaluation process in assessing and calculating vulnerabilities for one of our nation’s Critical Infrastructures identified, as Defense Industrial Base. A vulnerability assessment is a tool used to evaluate weaknesses of a facility against threats and hazards. Norman describes vulnerability as (Norman, 2010, p.32),” Any condition or factor associated with the selected target that can be exploited to carry out an attack – vulnerabilities may be individuals or systems.” The more vulnerable an asset is, the more it’s deemed attractive, or susceptible to threats. In general, a vulnerability assessment identifies an organizations most critical assets needed to continue its function. They help determine, if functions can be repeated under threat scenarios, or need to be …show more content…
Organizations use this tool to help combat terrorism and criminal intent. In addition, these assessments help identify which critical assets, should be given the highest priority, when faced with hazards, or threats. The main reason these assessments are vital are to maintain emergency preparedness and crisis response procedures. Secondly, vulnerability assessments mitigate and prevent threats from taking place. A Defense Industrial Base is a critical infrastructure sector designed to work for the Department of Defense. This sector conducts research, develop, design, produce, and deliver components, parts and weapon systems used by the military. The parts and weapons systems provide for our military forces worldwide. The Defense Industrial Base Sector covers a vast and detailed group of sites across the nation. They conduct and calculate vulnerability assessments through a detailed process. The first step of the process is to identify an organizations assets. The second step of the process is to conduct the assessment, as stated, by the Department of Homeland
National Missile Defense (NMD) is an extremely complex land-based ballistic missile system with the sole purpose of defending the United States against a ballistic missile attack from a foreign country. The NMD architecture consists of five main components.
Once this concept is understood, preparation and mitigation within the plan can be molded to fit the disaster event presented to a community. Identification of threats and hazards to mold preparation and mitigation is key when responding to the event. Every event will reveal new types of hazards and threats, thus it is up to the emergency manager and the planning team to assess and revise the EOP each and every time this occurs. Lessons learned per event will only make the community stronger in response to natural and/or man-made disasters moving
Protecting the United States from Nuclear Weapons of Mass Destruction through the National Missile Defense Program
The developing and maintaining of a homeland security plan requires an organization to evaluate all aspects of their infrastructure, as well as, to meet their obligation to the community/public in providing protection and business continuity in the event of a terrorist attack, or any form of natural disaster. Homeland security assessments are based on meeting what has been established as the Baldrige Criteria. “Conducting a comprehensive organizational assessment based on the Baldridge Criteria for homeland security preparedness provides organizational perspective of their readiness and vulnerabilities that exist within their overall infrastructure. The Baldrige Criteria can also provide
This is a continuous cycle of the National Preparedness System. This allows for consistent and reliable approach to decision-making, resource allocation, while measuring outcomes throughout preparedness and response. Identifying and assessing risk is paramount to the success of survival during a disaster of any kind man-made or natural alike. The risk assessment collects information on the threats of hazard as well as well as projected consequences (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2011). The information obtain is also used to determine the desired outcomes of the operation in affect.
Of this total, around $500 billion comprises the base budget which “includes funding for the procurement of military equipment and the daily operations costs of U.S. bases” (Gould & Bender, 2015). Basically, home defense measures amount to over eighty-percent of the nation’s defense budget. With these astronomical figures, one may question whether or not these types of expenditures are excessive when considering the infrequency of attacks on U.S. soil. To further break down this nearly $500 billion base budget, roughly $200 billion is allotted for operations/maintenance, $135 billion for military personnel, $90 billion for procurement, and $65 billion for research/development (Gould & Bender, 2015). In a world where people rush to purchase lottery tickets at the hopes of hitting a jackpot worth a few million, these expenditures are incomprehensible and may seem excessive; however, not everyone feels this way. In an article found on the U.S. Department of Defense’s website, the “DoD has done its best to manage through this prolonged period of budget uncertainty, the secretary said, making painful choices and tradeoffs” and that in “today’s security environment we need to be dynamic and we need to be responsive. What we have now is a straitjacket” (Pellerin, 2015). At the end of the day, it is all about who is being asked whether the defense
However, some sources say that the DHS lead National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) falls well short because of not listening and not sharing information with critical infrastructure owner/operators. The NIPP document created by the DHS is for the government and is not a plan to improve resilience. The document is said to lack private sector information and most feel that the meetings with the government about the document were not heard. As for the information sharing part of the document there are shortcomings that do not enhance national level situational awareness. However, there are seven topics raised in the new document after its original creation four years ago. The first is to elevate security and resilience as the primary aim of CIP efforts. Second, expanding and updating critical infrastructure risk management. Third, focus on national priorities jointly determined by public and private sector. Fourth, integrate cyber and physical security. Fifth, affirm the reality that critical infrastructure security and resilience require international collaboration. Sixth, show continued progress to support execution of the plan at both national and community levels. Lastly, present a detailed Call to Action that includes steps the federal government will undertake to work with partners to make progress toward security and
(1) “Arguably, the most important military component in the War on Terror is not the fighting we do ourselves, but how well we enable and empower our partners to defend and govern their own countries. How the Army should be organized and prepared for this advisory role remains an open question, and will require innovative and forward thinking.” — Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, 10 October 2007.1
Using principles of risk management can help policymakers reach informed decisions regarding the best ways to prioritize investments in security programs so that these investments target the areas of greatest need. (!) The DHS had to establish a risk management framework to help the department target its investments in security programs and disaster recovery based on risk. For DHS to have an effective way of conducting risk management, they had to develop a means for every agency to conduct risk management. DHS created the Risk Steering Committee who vision was to enable individual elements, groups of elements, or the entire homeland security enterprise to simultaneously and effectively assess, analyze, and manage risk from multiple perspectives across the homeland security mission space (National Research Council, 2010). One of their first tasking they took on to get the department on the same page was to establish a common vocabulary in dealing with risk management. The DHS Risk Steering Committee developed the Risk Lexicon, which made a common, unambiguous set of official terms and definitions to ease and improve the communication of risk-related issues for DHS (National Research Council, 2010). It facilitates consistency and uniformity in the usage of reporting risk-related information for the department and allots the Risk Steering Committee to set the priorities by evaluating the
Technology is constantly changing and as Army leaders, we should embrace the changes in technology to be efficient and affect effectiveness in our organizations. We must address the change in Army culture with respect to changes in technology using internal and external military communication platforms to share resources and work in partnership. Internal and external platforms are used to push information, pull information, and collaborate with other professionals. Both internal and external platforms facilitate the sharing of information but at a different scope. The internal platform is determined to reach each person within the organization, whereas external platforms reach each person outside of the organization.
...the nation’s critical infrastructure. With the creation of the DHS the government has shown that they are investing money and resources into protecting our nation’s infrastructure.
In his speech of March 23, 1983, President Reagan presented his vision of a future where a Nation’s security did not rest upon the threat of nuclear retaliation, but on the ability to protect and defend against such attacks. The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) research program was designed to tell whether, and how, advanced defense technologies could contribute to the feasibility of this vision.
Insinna, Valerie. "National Defense Industrial Association." (18 April 2013). National Defense. Article. 10 December 2013. http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/lists/posts/post.aspx?ID=1117
Unequivocally speaking, the threat of a cyber-attack has become one of the most critical domestic and national security challenges we face as a nation today. Infrastructures supporting government operations are ...
There are two categories to conducting a bomb threat assessment. The first category is the threat assessment. This is a list of ten questions pertaining to a verbal or written threat. There are yes or no answers for each question and a point is awarded for every yes. The score is then totaled and the threat of a bomb is increased with the increase of the score. The more detailed a caller or note is about the bomb leads to a (usual) more credible threat. Less accurate information such as mentioning details about the site that are blatantly incorrect increases the chance that the bomb threat is a hoax. The second category of target assessment is comprised of 12 questions and is more focused on the facility and its employees. The same principal for scoring is used as in the threat assessment. The more credible a threat is determined to be, the more urgency needs to be placed on evacuation and searching procedures.