Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Cleared Intelligence Contractors Readying for New Cybersecurity Reporting Requirements

By Susan B. Cassidy on August 18, 2014
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

When it became law on July 7, 2014, the 2014 Intelligence Authorization Act (“IAA”) gave the Director of National Intelligence (“DNI”) 90 calendar days to issue new regulations addressing the requirement that “cleared intelligence contractors” report any “successful penetration” of their networks and information systems.  With the DNI on the clock, what can these contractors expect?

For one thing, following a penetration of a covered network or information system, the DNI regulations will require that a cleared intelligence contractor report the following information to a designated element of the Intelligence Community (“IC”):

  • A description of the technique or method used in such penetration;
  • A sample of the malicious software, if discovered and isolated by the contractor, involved in such penetration; and
  • A summary of information created by or for an element of the IC that has been potentially compromised.

The DNI regulations will specify the turn-around time for these reports (by comparison, under regulations for Department of Defense contracts, a report would be required within 72 hours).

Some requirements may be more onerous.  For example, the DNI regulations will implement an IAA requirement that intelligence community contractors give IC personnel access to equipment or information in the event of a “successful penetration” of a covered network so that the IC personnel can conduct a forensic analysis of the breach.  The regulations should prohibit the IC from disseminating the information from such a forensic analysis without the contractor’s consent.  Still, whether the IC will be barred from using the information for other purposes, such as for responsibility or past performance determinations, is unclear.

For more detailed information concerning the rapid reporting requirements under the IAA, please see our recent blog post addressing this topic.

Photo of Susan B. Cassidy Susan B. Cassidy

Susan Cassidy co-chairs Covington’s Aerospace and Defense Industry Group, and has been advising government contractors for more than 35 years on the requirements imposed on companies contracting with the U.S. Government. She is Chambers ranked in both Government Contracts – Cybersecurity (Band 1)…

Susan Cassidy co-chairs Covington’s Aerospace and Defense Industry Group, and has been advising government contractors for more than 35 years on the requirements imposed on companies contracting with the U.S. Government. She is Chambers ranked in both Government Contracts – Cybersecurity (Band 1) and Government Contracts (Band 2).

Susan’s practice focuses on the intersection of cybersecurity, national security, and supply chain risk management for companies that sell products and services to the U.S. Government. Susan advises contractors at all phases of the procurement cycle, and regularly:

advises clients on compliance obligations imposed by the FAR, DFARS, and other agency regulatory requirements;
leads internal and government False Claims Act (FCA) investigations addressing allegations of violations of government cybersecurity, national security, supply chain, quality, and MIL-SPEC requirements; and
advises clients who have suffered a cyber breach where U.S. government information may have been impacted.

In her work with global, national, and start-up contractors, Susan advises companies on all aspects of government supply chain issues including:

Government cybersecurity requirements, including the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC), DFARS 252.204-7012, FedRAMP, controlled unclassified information (CUI), and NIST SP 800-171 requirements;
Evolving sourcing issues such as Section 889, counterfeit part requirements, Section 5949 semiconductor product and service restrictions, and limitations on sourcing a variety of products from China; and
Federal Acquisition Security Council (FASC) regulations and product exclusions.

Susan previously served as senior in-house counsel for two major defense contractors (Northrop Grumman Corporation and Motorola Incorporated). Chambers USA has quoted sources stating that “Susan’s in-house experience coupled with her deep understanding of the regulatory requirements is the perfect balance to navigate legal and commercial matters.”

Susan is a former Public Contract Law Procurement Division Co-Chair, former Co-Chair and current Vice-Chair of the ABA PCL Cybersecurity, Privacy and Emerging Technology Committee.

Susan’s pro-bono work extends to assisting veterans in a variety of matters, as well as providing advice to elderly clients on their wills and other end-of-life planning documents.

Read more about Susan B. CassidyEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Technology and AI
  • Blog:
    Inside Government Contracts
  • Organization:
    Covington & Burling LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo