One that has career structures built to develop talent in the field of technical and military Int collection, collation, analysis & effective dissemination.
We need to be capable of making big data driven decisions fast.
Recruitment & onboarding pipelines need to be tailored so that the DF can go to market for the talent that corporate Ireland is already competing for.
Which also means the Intelligence Corps needs to have a Reserve component so it can tap that high end talent at low holding cost
@defenceforces needs more than a cyber security incident response team (CSIRT), it needs ongoing cyber threat analysis integrated into the broader intelligence effort including Operational/ Open Source/Human/ Imagery/ Geospatial/ Signals Intelligence/ PsyOps/ Exploitation Ops etc
Then beyond identifying cyber threats to its networks and systems, the @defenceforces needs the capability to respond with or initiate offensive cyber operations, perhaps even joint operations across branches, or even partner nations.
Which means more organisational changes...
CIS needs to restructure its career pathway too. Currently the pipeline is geared towards creating telecom generalists after a lengthy onboarding period, rather than specialists in preset disciplines.
Meanwhile, @R_Signals are marketing for EW SIGINT operators & Cyber Engineers.
Again, this is where the @dfreserve has the advantage.
It can offer all the attractive aspects of military service, without compromising the earning capacity of civilian specialists.
But this requires @IRLDeptDefence to manage the relationship between the DF and employers.
In conjunction with recruitment pipelines and technical development career frameworks, we need to talk about pay.
People working in the field of cyber security & infra are commanding serious remuneration packages, the DF needs to compete € for €, or make an alternative offer.
Travel, adventure, unique skills & housing is typically what most Western militaries offer.
The life less ordinary
Only, the @IRLDeptDefence don't offer housing. When joining the PDF, you're not guaranteed to end up in the trade you signed up for. Travel & adventure is mixed.
Also add to the fact that cyber isn't as glamourous as the Danger Wing kicking doors in, & jumping out of helicopters.
What is the DF offering in terms of working environments? The Brugha? The Curragh?
Because the Big Tech companies are offering beanbags, Nerf guns and Segways.
So if the DF is only delivering on skills, and not offering only that which a military can in terms of travel, adventure, and housing, then it needs to compete on pay.
Otherwise, we can expect to see that newly acquired set of skills walk out the gate into a firm that will pay.
Beyond technical execution and threat analysis, both the @defenceforces & @IRLDeptDefence will need Cyber specific legal oversight. Especially if an offensive capability is being developed. @IRLCoDF will need to factor that into its structural recommendations.
The Transport Corps will need specialisation in cyber supply chain management.
Military Police will need cyber forensics built into their skills matrix.
Even line units will need to build in information management and cyber hygiene monitors right down to the section level.
After all, it only takes that one guy at the forming up point wearing a knock off "Garmin" watch that he bought from Ali Express to spoil months worth of operational planning, risk the lives of all his comrades and damage Ireland's reputation.
I know the @IRLCoDF have a lot to think about here, hopefully the Public Consultation will bear some fruit, and offer some solutions to the Irish Defence cyber problems.
That said, it can't hurt to have a further chat with @2Cisar on what's achievable, scalable, & sustainable.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"With regard to the RDF, the Commission will consider a wide range of options and will make recommendations to better leverage the capabilities of the RDF in their supports to the PDF and to make service in the RDF a more attractive option."
Thankfully, the "Abolition of the Reserve" wasn't considered an option in the Terms of Reference as it was in the DoD's 2012 "Value for Money" Review of the RDF.
I would link the source, but the DoD have opted not to host it despite it informing the 2015 White Paper Policy.
The 2012 Steering Committee comprised of Civil & Military (but not a single Reservist) personnel saw no role for the Reserve as the "PDF could meet all day-to-day tasks".
8 years on, & DF capability is limited due to a crippling retention crisis as a result of DoD mismanagement.
@simoncoveney - "I will be encouraging [The Commission on Defence] to be ambitious & if necessary, quite radical to reflect the future defence & security challenges"
"I think we're in a good space here"
@BerryCathal "What the Minister has proposed has exceeded my expectations"
Solid foundations are being laid for what might well be a very progressive set of recommendations by the Commission on Defence.
We need a force structure that is capable of managing the domains of responsibility that we have. That means listening to military expertise that is driven by a desire for capability, over civil advice that is driven by cost