El ej\u00e9rcito ha dependido en gran medida de los contratistas para el desarrollo de software, y lo sigue haciendo. Sin embargo el Ej\u00e9rcito, la Armada y la Infanter\u00eda de Marina han descubierto que los ingenieros y los desarrolladores de software propios son muy efectivos para crear r\u00e1pidamente capacidades ad hoc, mejorar los tiempos de respuesta a las amenazas y mejorar los resultados de la misi\u00f3n t\u00e1ctica. Cada elemento integrado al Comando Cibern\u00e9tico de EE. UU. ha organizado equipos de codificadores, ingenieros y desarrolladores de herramientas. Construyen prototipos r\u00e1pidos y nuevas soluciones, ampl\u00edan las plataformas existentes, realizan investigaciones de vulnerabilidades y an\u00e1lisis de malware, y prueban y eval\u00faan software.<\/p>\n
WASHINGTON \u2014 The military has relied heavily on contractors for highly technical work to develop software for cyber operators. But the Army, Navy and Marine Corps have found that in-house engineers and tool developers can quickly create mission capabilities to improve threat response times and mission outcomes.<\/p>\n
While industry software specialists continue to complement the military\u2019s internal efforts, each of the service cyber components that feed up to U.S. Cyber Command has organized teams of coders, engineers and tool developers. They build rapid prototypes and new solutions, extend existing platforms, conduct vulnerability research and malware analysis, and test and evaluate software.<\/p>\n
These personnel support the cyber mission force operations and provide wide expertise for their services on cyberspace and vulnerabilities.<\/p>\n
For example, Fleet Cyber Command said it provided requested developers to Naval Sea Systems Command to determine how adversaries might compromise a shipboard system. Within a week, the developers identified potential cyber vulnerabilities and suggested corrections.<\/p>\n
Army coders figure out how to best secure weapons systems and give combatant commanders effective options that align with their operations. Some examples include implementing systems designed to defend soldiers from small unmanned aerial system attacks and analyzing weapon systems\u2019 attack surface to patch vulnerabilities.<\/p>\n
The Marine Corps\u00a0combines a mix of personnel<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 developers, analysts and operators \u2014 to achieve mission outcomes, a Marines spokesperson said.<\/p>\n MARFORCYBER noted there isn\u2019t a set ratio for developers to operators, instead emphasizing adaptability. The Air Force and Navy declined to offer specifics on their ratios. Army Cyber Command explained it tries to ensure that a good percentage of developers provide direct support to several kinds of cyber teams:<\/p>\n In fact, the Army recently\u00a0experimented with coders at the edge<\/a>\u00a0for these teams to reprogram electronic warfare and radio frequency systems.<\/p>\n Army Cyber Command said a mix of developers, analysts and operators support of the command\u2019s mission.<\/p>\n 16th Air Force acknowledged that it has its own software develop program associated with its cyber mission set, but declined to offer specifics citing operational security. In one known example, the 67th Cyberspace Wing is experimenting with an approach it describes as\u00a0software factory as a service<\/a>, renting commercial space for software factories \u2014 such as the LevelUP DevSecOps facility \u2014 to develop tools for the cyber mission force.<\/p>\n\n