NATO Awards Largest Cyber-Security Contract To Date 45
Sara Chan writes "NATO has awarded its largest cyber-security contract to date, in a move that is expected to prompt member states to augment their own cyber-security capabilities. The contract, for €58 million ($76 million), is to design and implement NATO's Computer Incident Response Capability. NCIRC will enable NATO to monitor computer networks from its headquarters in Brussels and detect and respond to cyber threats and vulnerabilities at about 50 NATO sites in 28 countries. The project is intended to meet the requirements of a declaration by NATO Head of States at the Lisbon Summit, in November 2010, which called for the achievement of NCIRC Full Operational Capability by end of 2012."
Yes... (Score:1, Insightful)
...please continue throwing money in bullshit contract for 50+ millions EUR. For that price, it's *gotta* protect you, right ? except one guy with a proper zero day and extensive knowledge will still be able to take you down. At the point we're at (or close by), complete societal changes or conscious AIs is the only thing that's gonna offer any sort of protection at all (captcha: nonsense, haha).
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I was thinking of all of the "over budget" crap and PR made security companies that have failed over the years.
That money would be better spent on education and strong rules to control security.
Re: (Score:1)
It seems like 'Anonymous' did the job that was required to ensure the flow on off multi-million dollar contracts. A new corporate protection racket is born, what's the bet anyone who doesn't pay get a visit from 'Anonymous'. Don't forget we are talking contracts in the ten's of millions, even hundreds of millions.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you propose NATO sets up a network with no security? If €58 million is too high, what would you have bid on it?
Re: (Score:2)
€57 million of course :-D
Re: (Score:2)
That's why these are often judged on "best value" versus "lowest cost".
Re: (Score:2)
but then it wouldn't work as employment tool.
that's what throwing 70 million extra to something that's already budgeted for is.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
>> If you have a system that must not be compromised, then don't connect it to the fucking Internet.
Those are called secret or top secret network and they are removed from the Internet either logically, by inline encrypters, or physically separate networks. At some point you have to be on a network connected to the Internet if you want to communicate with people outside of NATO, though. How else would I deal with contractors, state departments or national military users?
We can argue that €58 mill
Re: (Score:2)
We can argue that Euros 58 million is too high and I'd probably agree, but in the end, NATO still has a network that needs security measures applied to it.
How much is 40m pounds stirling? [guardian.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
~47m euro to the contractor and 58m euro "in total" could very well be the same contract, depending on perspective. There is a cost to developing, evaluating, awarding, monitoring, etc. these contracts outside of what goes to the winner.
Re: (Score:3)
How much would you have bid, AC? Make sure you follow the bidding instructions and show how you can deliver for an order of magnitude less.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Yes... (Score:4, Informative)
We don't know it's a bullshit contract until we have the name of the contractor to research some background (please include those details in the summary in future). I'm admitting that I haven't RTFA, but as soon as I read headlines like these I want to research the contractor.
I am the story submitter. The contractors are Finmeccanica and Northrop Grumman [janes.com]. Some research background is given in the last link in the summary.
Re: (Score:2)
Wish they can defend army of Chinese cyber hackers (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
So, who gets to decide exactly *what* constitutes a "CyberThread"?
The CyberThreat Czar of course. For a country founded in part of ridding itself of a monarchy, the United States of Amerika seems Hell bent on establishing its own monarchy given all the czars named over the past twenty years. May I be Czar of Sarcasm, please?
Re: (Score:2)
Awful lot of czarcasm in that post!
...
I'll just let myself out now.
Where will the hardware be made? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'll bet I don't think this is a good idea...
Re: (Score:1)
pay no attention to the man behind the curtain ...
Re: (Score:2)
What do you want to bet most of the hardware the UN purchases will be manufactured behind the Iron Firewall?
I don't know, but I can ask our outsourced procurement office in China :)
Large governmental software projects (Score:1)
Large project, governmental work, aggressive schedule?
Be ready for an humongous cost overrun.
Why NATO? (Score:1, Redundant)
I'm sure the bureaucrats in Brussels like their $1.5 billion headquarters... but really, does NATO still need to exist? Warsaw Pact is dead. Soviet Union is dead. Whatever NATO is doing, they can hand it off to the UN.
Talk about a bureaucracy existing for bureaucracy's sake.
I suppose 50 years from now we'll all still be stripping down and bending over at TSA checkpoints.
Re:Why NATO? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
NATO is not a function of the UN... while members of NATO may be UN members, NATO is an independent organization of member states that formed after WWII to contain and defend against the USSR.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Centralized monitoring and control (Score:2)
Guess where the bad guys are going to focus their efforts.
Rated W... (Score:1)
Didn't Ike Warn Us? (Score:2)
Successful bidders (Score:4, Interesting)
Local Echelon (Score:1)
Easy (Score:2)
1. Nuke Brussels (not much of a loss)
2. Let the viruses do the rest.
3. Profit $$$