Mediaboss Marketing

Best listening experience is on Chrome, Firefox or Safari. Subscribe to Federal Drives daily audio interviews onApple PodcastsorPodcastOne.

When the National Security Agency recently awarded Amazon a multi-billion-dollar cloud computing contract, you can guess what happened. Once again, as in the Defense Departments JEDI program, the deal is tied up in protest, only this time Microsoft is the protester. DoD eventually scrapped the whole program. With how the NSA award is likely to play out, Federal Drive with Tom Temin turned to a partner at the law firm Boies Schiller Flexner, Hamish Hume.

Tom Temin: Mr. Hume, good to have you on.

Hamish Hume: Great to be on Tom.

Tom Temin: Glad to have you in studio with us. And first of all, give us the status of this current NSA award. When did it happen and where does it stand right now?

Hamish Hume: So the NSA award to Amazon was made just about two weeks ago or a bit more in early August and was immediately challenged by Microsoft in front of the GAO. Its not yet in court and therefore its not yet public. We cant see Microsofts challenge. But its sitting there at the GAO and the GAO has said it expects to issue a decision by October 29.

Tom Temin: And this is a weird one, because it looks like son of JEDI or daughter of JEDI or child of JEDI, I guess, to be politically correct. Nowadays, multi-billion, multi-year single award. What do you think the NSA was thinking?

Hamish Hume: Well, its hard to tell, and it is very curious. It is said to be a $10 billion award, which is the same number they used for JEDI. And even though the NSA is under the Department of Defense, it is not 100% clear whether the NSA was part of the original JEDI contract, but one would assume that it was. And the very same month that Amazon obtained an injunction against the award to Microsoft of the JEDI contract in February 2020, is when the NSA announced that it was going to be issuing a solicitation for this new contract. So its complicated, and Im happy to run through that chronology, but it does appear tied together but in ways that are not 100%. transparent.

Tom Temin: This is no way possibly a DoD insurance policy for JEDI.

Hamish Hume: You never know. I mean, JEDI has now the one other important update is a month before this award was made to Amazon in July of this year, a couple of months ago, DOJ announced that it was scrapping and canceling the JEDI contract, and Amazon obviously welcomed that news. It had been challenging it. Microsoft, I would say put out a notice saying they accepted it and understood it. But they obviously were not happy about it. So JEDI has been scrapped and an NSA award has been made the very next month, and that award is now being challenged.

Tom Temin: Alright, there were a lot of grounds for the challenge. It was complicated in the JEDI case, because of officials that had worked in DoD that allegedly had a conflict of interest. And without relitigating that whole case, in your experience, and you have done a lot of protest litigation over the decades, how will this likely play out do you think?

Hamish Hume: Well, bid protest litigation is very hard to win. Theres a fairly high percentage when youre at the GAO of the agency taking some corrective action to sort of dot the Is and cross the Ts to do everything perfectly and get it all correct. But to really overturn an award particularly or an award of this magnitude is very, very difficult to do. We were fortunate to be able to do one for a company called Palantir against the US Army. But in general, its extremely difficult to do. I do think its worth going back to understand the nature of the awards the first time around because despite what I just said, Amazon was able to get an injunction to the first JEDI award on fairly narrow grounds, despite having sweeping claims and its complained about President Trumps improper influence. They ended up getting that injunction on quite a narrow technical basis. But it proved to be what appears to have been a game changer

Tom Temin: Because in a lot of the public statements, Microsoft and Amazon traded barbs about who was more technically qualified. I mean, the reality is this probably Tweedledee, Tweedledum, when it comes to technology prowess between a company like Microsoft, a company like Amazon, so it could be maybe in the details of the percentage of pennies per transaction that happens in the cloud, which could add up to millions over the years. I dont know. We really cant tell at this point, though, can we?

Hamish Hume: We cannot tell. And Im not an expert on cloud technology. as such. However, its worth noting that despite what you say and what one would think about they must have similar technology. The injunction that Amazon one was based on a very technical point buried within the solicitation and the bid documents, that one of the requirements under just one of numerous scenarios in the original jet award was for the cloud storage system to be quote, highly accessible, which seems obvious, but they they had an offer or they had to ask for a specific definition of what is highly accessible mean. And the DoD says, well it means you have to have either online storage or replicated storage. And the whole lawsuit, the injunction boiled down to the definition of online storage, which meant it had to be available immediately without any human effort or input. And the judge held that Amazon prevailed on the injunction because the judge held that Microsofts bid did not satisfy that requirement. When you read the opinion, it talks about how Microsofts bid documents, instead of talking about online storage, talked about some other kinds of storage, the adjective, which is redacted, which is a great illustration of how even once these cases go to court and get decided, its very hard to tell sometimes what exactly they turned on. But right now, we really dont know what Microsofts arguments are. Theyre better off if they have a clean legal argument, because the standard is highly deferential on anything factual.

Tom Temin: Were speaking with protest attorney Hamish Hume, hes a partner at Boies Schiller Flexner. And there seems to be a bigger issue at work here. And that is over the years, the government has tried to get itself to set requirements, as opposed to technical specifications for everything it buys. This goes back to when Al Gore was vice president and the word three pages of specifications for ashtrays, that was the example that used back then. And so could it be that the government is trying to say we want a highly available cloud thats really secure, and the reference standards for that, of course, and then the bidders are coming in with technical expressions of that requirement, and then fighting over the technical specifications, when really the government was trying to get a large requirement done.

Hamish Hume: Yes, I think what youre talking about now is is a problem near and dear to my heart. From my old case, I think I think some of that is probably whats going on. Theres even debate amongst the different industry players of exactly what a cloud facility means. It can mean different things to different people. It can mean infrastructure as a service platform as a service, it can sometimes even mean software as a service. Theres a National Institute of Standards and Technology definition of the cloud that people have to adhere to. But in general, the government would always like things done differently for it. And the law requires it to the maximum extent possible to buy what the commercial market makes available. And that was the legal ground on which we won the Palantir case. I dont know that thats going to be an issue in this case, because I think they are buying fixed price as a commercial item. But then they want it modified. Particularly DoD is always going to want things modified for its particular needs. And that may well end up being part of what is at issue in the current case, but we really dont know.

Tom Temin: So one more piece of speculation, it could be over security, for example.

Hamish Hume: Absolutely. And in fact, that was one of the issues that Oracle also challenged, the JEDI contract. They didnt challenge the award, they challenged the original solicitation. And one of the things they challenged was there, there was a gating threshold requirement for any bidder had to have I forget was section 1.2, or something had to have at least two or three different physical locations with servers at least 150 miles apart. And that was obviously for national security reasons, although Oracle argued was unnecessary and shouldnt have been at least a gating issue. So I would expect that national security issues and the security of the cloud will be central to any discussion of this. And the government will get enormous amounts of deference in court from that, which is why the only way to win one of these cases is to have a really clear legal defect or a very, very clear, factual defect that a judge will feel comfortable designing it on, because anything general or vague, theyre going to defer to the government.

Tom Temin: And of course, a leading DC law firm doesnt go in with hunches when it goes into court, but based on your experience, and what little we do know of this, is your gut telling you that the NSA will prevail this time around?

Hamish Hume: I think if youre a betting person, you would in these cases always bet on the government. And I think the NSA, it will have been a narrower contract than JEDI, I think they will have had the benefit of the JEDI litigation to look at. And that absent some really clear legal defect of some kind, I would expect they probably will prevail. And then the interesting question is, what is the rest of DoD going to do? Is there going to be a different kind of JEDI? Theres a talk in the press of the Joint Warfighter Cloud Capability that JWCC, instead of JEDI, they basically tried to spin the cancellation of JEDI as just technology making the original requirements obsolete to go to your earlier point. And theyre going to come out with new requirements that need to be met, and that it wasnt because of the litigation. And maybe thats completely accurate. I dont know. But Im sure the litigation contributed, at least to some degree. And so what remains to be seen whether theyre going to do it as a single request for the rest of the DoD, or different sub agencies within DoD will have different requests. And the other huge question is are they going to want a sole supplier, a sole vendor, which was what Oracle was complaining about with JEDI that it was it was crafted for only one winner or sometimes what theyll do is theyll have a group of winners to win the original contract and then they have subsequent task orders for specific tasks. And theyre actually supposed to favor that latter approach whenever possible.

Tom Temin: Protest attorney Hamish Hume is a partner at Boies Schiller Flexner. Thanks so much for joining me.

Hamish Hume: Absolutely, Tom. Thanks for having me.

Follow this link:
Microsoft and Amazon are at it again over a cloud computing contract - Federal News Network

Tom Nurre| Angelo State University

The National Centers of Academic Excellence in Cybersecurity, as part of the National Security Agency, has awarded a grant in the amount of $1.67 million to the Center for Infrastructure Assurance and Security at The University of Texas at San Antonioto help communities become more cyber secure nationwide.

The CIAS will work with multiple communities during the two-year grant, beginning with Angelo State University and the City of San Angelo, to help develop a community-wide K-12 cybersecurity program, support local industry and government to be more cyber resilient, and help local academic institutions to develop cybersecurity programs for students by helping create Centers of Academic Excellence.

The UTSA team was awarded the grant following a competitive selection process available only to universities identified as Centers of Academic Excellence. UTSA is the only Hispanic Serving Institution to hold three National Center of Excellence designations from the NSA and the Department of Homeland Security.

The CIAS is collaborating with ASU to develop a program that will be transferable and applicable to communities of any size.

"Communities nationwide are becoming increasingly targeted by cyber threats - both domestic and foreign - which is why a whole-community approach needs to be taken by communities to protect their citizens, organizations and infrastructures from cyberattacks," said Dr. Greg White, director of the CIAS. "This NSA grant will enable the CIAS to work with Angelo State University to implement a cybersecurity program that starts with K-12 education and continues on into local businesses, government and the general public."

The CIAS at UTSA has helped State, Local, Tribal and Territorial (SLTT) entities establish cybersecurity programs since 2002. Cybersecurity exercises, training efforts and assessments for states and communities have also been conducted for nearly 20 years, but this will be the first effort to integrate an entire cybersecurity program within a whole community.

"We're excited about the opportunity to bring our experience and resources into the city of San Angelo," said Dr. White. "This program will develop sustainable initiatives that will help the whole community become cybersecurity savvy."

"I have served with Dr. White when we were both lieutenants stationed at Offutt AFB, Neb., and majors at the United States Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colo.," said ASU President Ronnie Hawkins Jr. "I have nothing but the utmost confidence and respect for his vision and wisdom when it comes to cybersecurity. It is an honor to serve with him again; especially in this capacity by ASU contributing to and supporting the students throughout San Angelo by piloting this unique program."

The two-year pilot program will, in part, establish a K-12 cybersecurity initiative for elementary, middle and high schools that will provide cybersecurity lesson plans, tools and resources to students, teachers and counselors during the school year. It will also expand cybersecurity summer camps and encourage the establishment of CyberPatriot teams and Cyber Threat Defender tournaments.

Additionally, this grant will help establish a Culture of Cybersecurity program that targets K-5 students and a collegiate initiative that will provide an outreach program to area high schools, establish National Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition teams, develop certification training and assist 2- and 4-year institutions to meet the requirements for a NSA/DHS Center of Academic of Excellence designation.

Other focus areas will target the establishment of local cybersecurity associations, establishing a continuing education initiative to assist individuals in receiving certifications, a training initiative for non-profit organizations, analysis of current needs for cybersecurity professionals within the community, a community Cybersecurity Day and a whole-community cybersecurity program using the Community Cyber Security Maturity Model to include the establishment of a community Information Sharing and Analysis Organization.

"When this grant ends, the city of San Angelo will be the model for other communities across the state and the nation," said Dr. White. "We look forward to expanding this program to other states during the second year of the pilot."

"This is a first-of-its-kind pilot and will be a 'game changer' for the students and citizens here in San Angelo," President Hawkins said. "We have already spoken to Mayor Brenda Gunter, Dr. Carl Dethloff, superintendent of the San Angelo Independent School District, and Col. Andres Nazario, commander at Goodfellow Air Force Base, about pushing this pilot throughout the city, as well as Tom Green County. This pilot also helps us in our efforts to be recognized as a Center of Academic Excellence by the NSA."

Original post:
Angelo State University to serve as first school in national cybersecurity program - Standard-Times

WASHINGTON: The United States and Pakistan have a shared interest in working together in Afghanistan, National Security Adviser Moeed Yusuf said in a phone interview with The Washington Post on Thursday. But the NSA pointed out that cooperation would require fixing the bilateral relationship by moving past problems.

Afghan instability could lead to more terrorism, refugees and economic hardship for Pakistan, Moeed Yusuf said while speaking with Josh Rogin, who worked the interview into an opinion piece which appeared in the newspaper under the headline, Pakistan wants to be treated like an ally, not a scapegoat.

Columnist Rogin said it was unfortunate that instead of addressing Pakistans reservations, the country was being indicted by American media for its alleged support to Taliban over the years. He suggested Washington to seriously consider Pakistans offer of cooperation.

Right now, in the situation we are in, how are US and Pakistans interests not aligned, Moeed Yusuf said in reply to a question.

Im not asking for any sympathy for Pakistan, the NSA said. Im thinking in terms of pure US selfish national interests. How does it help to push away a country of this size, stature and power, he wondered.

Josh Rogin noted that Pakistan stands perennially accused of providing safe haven for the Taliban, but on the other hand officials in Islamabad point out that Pakistan had lost soldiers, as well as thousands of non-combatants, at the hands of extremists since 9/11.

Pakistan is the victim. We had nothing to do with 9/11. We teamed up with the US to fight back and after that there was a major backlash on Pakistan, Moeed Yusuf recalled.

But let all that pass. We need to work out how to move forward as partners because neither side can do without the other in terms of stability in the region.

The US-supported government of president Ashraf Ghani in Kabul, he added, used Pakistan as a scapegoat for its own ineptitude, corruption and unpopularity.

Pakistan helped bring the Taliban to the negotiating table at Washingtons request, got blocked out of the negotiations and was now being blamed for the outcome, the NSA pointed out. Did Pakistan tell the Afghan National Army not to fight? Did Pakistan tell Ashraf Ghani to run away?

Moeed Yusuf said it was obvious the western media had been misreporting the situation in Afghanistan for a long time. Otherwise, he observed, the collapse of the entire state structure within a week was mystifying.

So somebody was lying, somebody was misreporting, or somebody was mistaken about the reality when it came to informing the taxpayers of the Western world.

Recalling a government statement of last week about the Taliban takeover of Kabul, the Washington Post columnist said it becomes apparent there is actually significant overlap with the Biden administrations policy goals.

Pakistan, he wrote, is calling upon the Taliban to work with other ethnic groups for a political settlement that would lead to the formation of an inclusive government in Kabul. Pakistan has urged the Taliban to respect international law and human rights, Josh Rogin said. Islamabad agrees with President Joe Biden that withdrawing all US troops is the right decision.

Pakistan wants the United States to find a way to engage diplomatically with the Taliban, Rogin said, referring to the Pakistani statement. On his part, Moeed Yusuf said Washington should not isolate Afghanistan to punish its new rulers.

Now that the Taliban have the whole country, they dont really need Islamabad as much anymore, he said. Assistance and recognition are the leverage. Who has that? The Western countries have much more leverage in Afghanistan than Pakistan has.

Moeed Yusuf emphasised that the international community must support Afghanistan to avoid a humanitarian crisis in the region.

In an interview to BBC Radio on the situation in Afghanistan, the NSA said Pakistan had so far helped evacuate more than 7,000 people from Kabul and was issuing visas on arrival to those coming through the land route.

Dr Moeed underlined that it was wrong to blame Pakistan for the situation in Afghanistan as it was itself badly affected by the turmoil.

The NSA said if the international community left Afghanistan to fend for itself, a catastrophe is impending.

Published in Dawn, August 27th, 2021

More here:
Pakistan, US should move on and work together in Afghanistan: NSA - DAWN.com

Pakistan's National Security Advisor, Moeed Yusuf interacted virtually on Thursday (August 26) with a wide spectrum of British leadership as he opened up on the ongoing Taliban crisis, stating Afghanistan is at risk of a "security vacuum" without an international push for an "inclusive government".

Yusuf also said that the West has "embarrassed" itself by refusing to listen to Pakistan over its take on Afghanistan's ousted government led by Ashraf Ghani. He added thatthe West should help Afghans by engaging with the Taliban to ensure a "governance model".

In a speech to the Conservative thinktank Policy Exchange and as reported by The Guardian, Yusuf called for an internationally coordinated effort to establish the Taliban government. He mentioned that there's a need to have "an inclusive government, rights protected, a moderate governance model".

ALSO READ | Pakistan is second home to the Taliban, says spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid

Yusuf dismissed the claims that Islamabad had allowed a porous border to give Taliban access in Pakistan, hiding from US forces.

However, this comes immediately after the controversial statement made by Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid who claimed that Pakistan is like the "second home" of the organisation and that activities that are not in line with the interests of neighbouring countries are not allowed on the territory of Afghanistan.

'Mistakes of the 90s'

Pakistan NSA warned that if the world repeats the "mistakes of the 90s", the results will not be better than last time. He said, "If we again find the easy path and say 'we are done and out of here,' the international legitimacy of the western world will disappear in one second."

"We will have a humanitarian crisis, we will have instability and we will have a security vacuum that terrorists may fill, again targeting Pakistan first and the western world second," he said.

He also accused the West of turning Pakistan into a "scapegoat" and said that the "world should stand up" now and say we will learn lessons, something has gone wrong.

ALSO READ | 'Biden has blood on his hands': Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers slam US president after Kabul blasts

"When the real problems on the ground a lack of trust, corruption, an army not able to stand up were completely ignored," said Pakistan's NSA.

Go here to read the rest:
Pakistan`s NSA wants the West to `engage` with Taliban for `inclusive government` - WION

WASHINGTON: The United States and Pakistan have a shared interest in working together in Afghanistan, Prime Minister Imran Khan's National Security Adviser, Moeed Yusuf, has said, but pointed out that it will require fixing the bilateral relationship by "moving past their problems."

"Afghan instability could lead to more terrorism, refugees and economic hardship for Pakistan," he said in a phone interview with The Washington Post columnist, Josh Rogin, whose opinion piece appeared in the newspaper on Thursday under the headline: Pakistan wants to be treated like an ally, not a scapegoat.

Columnist Rogin argued that instead of engaging with Pakistan, the country is being indicted in American media coverage for its alleged support of the Taliban over the years, and he proposed that the US "seriously consider Pakistan's offer of cooperation."

"Right now, in the situation we are in, how are US and Pakistan's interests not aligned?", Moeed Yusuf, asked in the interview, which Rogin worked into his column. "I am not asking for any sympathy for Pakistan," Yusuf said. "I am thinking in terms of pure US selfish national interests. How does it help to push away a country of this size, stature and power?", he asked.

Rogin also noted that Pakistan perennially stands accused of providing havens for the Taliban, but Pakistani officials point out that tens of thousands of Pakistani soldiers have died fighting extremists in their own country since 9/11.

"Pakistan is the victim. We had nothing to do with 9/11. We teamed up with the US to fight back and after that there is a major backlash on Pakistan," Yusuf said.

The US-supported government in Kabul, he said, used Pakistan as a scapegoat to excuse its own ineptitude, corruptions and unpopularity. Pakistan helped bring the Taliban to the negotiating table at Washington's request, got cut out of the negotiations and is now being blamed for the outcome, it was pointed out.

"Did Pakistan tell the Afghan National Army not to fight? Did Pakistan tell Ashraf Ghani to run away?" Moeed Yusuf said.

"The entire state collapsed in a week. So somebody was lying, somebody was misreporting, or somebody was mistaken about the reality and when it came to informing the taxpayers of the Western world."

Noting PM Khan's government last week's statement about the Taliban's takeover, Rogin said it "becomes apparent there is actually significant overlap with the Biden administration's policy goals."

Pakistan, the columnist pointed out, is calling for the Taliban to work with other ethnic groups toward a political settlement to establish an inclusive government in Kabul. Pakistan has urged the Taliban to respect international law and human rights, and he also wrote that Islamabad agrees with President Joe Biden that withdrawing all US troops was the right decision. Pakistan also wants the United States to increase its diplomatic and economic involvement in Afghanistan and to find a way forward to engage diplomatically with the Taliban, Rogin said, referring to the Pakistani statement.

On his part, Moeed Yusuf said, the United States should not isolate Afghanistan to punish its new rulers.

"Now that the Taliban has the whole country, they don't really need Islamabad as much anymore," he said. "Assistance and recognition is the leverage. Who has that? It's the Western countries that have much more leverage in Afghanistan than Pakistan."

In this regard, Rogin carried in his column former US Ambassador to Afghanistan and Pakistan Ryan Crocker remarks in The New York Times last week that the United States made a mistake by disengaging with Pakistan in the 1990s and would be repeating that mistake by turning away from Islamabad now.

"We need to be engaged with Pakistan on ways to assess and deal with this enhanced threat," wrote Crocker. "The prospect of violent destabilization of a country with about 210 million people and nuclear weapons is not a pretty one," the diplomat added.

The NSA told Rogin that the US-Pakistan relationship can't be just about Afghanistan; the two countries share a much broader range of interests. But first, the United States must learn the lessons of the 1990s, when it abandoned Afghanistan. Otherwise it can expect a similar outcome.

"If a security vacuum is left in Afghanistan by abandoning it, you will see that these terrorist organizations take root again. Let's not kid ourselves," Moeed Yusuf said.

In his concluding comments, Rogin wrote, "Given (President Joe) Biden's haphazard withdrawal from Afghanistan and the Taliban takeover, the United States has little alternative but to seriously consider Pakistan's offer of cooperation. Sure, it might not work, but it's worth a shot."

See the original post:
US, Pakistan have shared interest in Afghanistan: NSA - Business Recorder