RFI Yoshida Tactical CHVP Inline Encryptor.pdf

Request for Information (RFI)

{Announcement Number}: FA8307-26-R-CHVPInlineEncryptor

YOSHIDA TACTICAL: Small Form Factor (SFF) CHVP Inline Encryptor

Notice Type: Request for Information

NAICS Code: N/A

Size Standard: N/A

1. Disclaimer

This RFI is NOT a Request for Proposal, Invitation for Bid, or an announcement of a solicitation; it is only intended for information purposes. There is no bid package or solicitation document associated with this announcement. Response to this RFI is not required: it is being used solely to transmit information to interested parties in Industry. Any requests for a solicitation package will be disregarded. No entitlement to payment of direct or indirect costs or charges to the government will arise as a result or preparing submissions in response to this RFI and the government’s use of such information.

Submittals will not be returned to the sender.

2. Objective

The United States Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Cryptologic and Cyber Systems Division (CCSD), AFLCMC/HNC, Joint Base San Antonio, Texas, seeks information on next-generation, quantum-resilient, miniaturized cryptographic solutions for tactical edge operations. AFLCMC/HNCA requests industry input on NSA-certified Cryptographic High- Value Product (CHVP) devices, compliant with Commercial National Security Algorithm Suite 2.0 (CNSA 2.0) and SERD 2.0 for protection of “Secret and Below (SaB)” information.

The solution must be quantum-resilient, highly optimized for Size, Weight, Power, and Cost (SWaP-C), and support modern tactical data throughput. The device must be CHVP, require no manual key fill, and be suitable for rapid fielding and integration at the tactical edge. The device should be suitable for unattended and/or unmonitored operations, and consideration must be given to emergency and automated zeroization to enable “leave-behind” handling capability.

This RFI is a direct follow-on to the 2025 “Non-CCI, Small Form Factor, High Assurance End Cryptographic Unit (ECU) Optimal for Tactical Edge” RFI. If you submitted a response in 2025, please resubmit to this request for additional review and consideration.

3. REQUIREMENTS DESCRIPTION

The Yoshida Tactical (YT) device must be capable of the following:

3.1. Cryptographic Algorithms and Certification

Quantum Resilience:

Must implement NSA-approved CNSA 2.0 algorithms for encryption, digital signature, and key agreement.

Certification:

Must be NSA-certified as a CHVP for “Secret and Below (SaB)”

Backward Compatibility:

Support for legacy algorithms may be considered for interoperability with potential trust roots such as DoW PKI, but post-quantum algorithms are mandatory for forward security.

Reprogram ability and other factors supporting crypto-agility are highly encouraged.

3.2. Key Management

Automated Key Management:

Shall be self-keying using “Tactical Key Management Architecture (TKMA)” or similar key management methodology. Shall not require an SKL or other manual key loader.

Group Management:

Must support secure group keying and rapid rekey in case of device loss or compromise.

Zeroization:

Must support event-based and on-command zeroization.

3.3. Size, Weight, Power, and Throughput

The device does not have a specific, mission-required physical size or throughput currently formalized. Estimate what physical trade-offs could be explored within your proposed architecture:

• What throughput could be achieved in the smallest form-factor? For example, for certain user needs, very low bandwidth devices may still be useful if the physical form factor is low enough.

• How does performance, power consumption, and size scale within your architecture?

• Can the architecture support dynamic power usage adjustment based upon throughput?

• Are there any other considerations (management interface, component availability or quantity, thermal challenges, capabilities, etc.) to consider when scaling throughput or size? No concrete relationships need to be explained; estimates or hypotheses based upon your architecture will help in RFP planning.

3.4. Interfaces and Integration

Drop-in IP Encryptor:

Must operate as a drop-in encryptor for any IP-based network, including seamless integration with Harris, TrellisWare, MPU-5, and IP-based SATCOM systems.

Direct DoDIN interface potential:

Device may need to directly interface with DoDIN but will focus on securing data to pass over untrusted networks.

3.5. Environmental and Lifecycle

Ruggedization:

Must withstand salt, sand, humidity, submersion, cold, hot, shock, vibration, dust, and mud. Target ruggedization requirements commonly used in handheld and man-portable radio design.

Interoperability:

Device is interoperable only with other YT devices; not designed for direct interoperability with other encryption devices such as HAIPEs.

Supportability:

Must support secure upgradable software, firmware, and algorithms. Consideration should be given to sustainment impact including which types of updates can be accomplished in the field and which updates may require the device to be returned to a depot or other maintenance location.

Training:

Minimal training should be required; device must be plug-and-play and all actions requiring operator interaction should consider impact to training requirements.

4. CONTRACTOR CAPABILITY SURVEY

Interested businesses are invited to respond by providing the following:

Part I – Business Information:

• Company Name:

• Address:

• CAGE Code and UEI:

• Point of Contact (Name, Email, Phone):

• Website:

• Business Size and Socioeconomic Status under NAICS {NAICS Code and Description}

• Small Business / Woman-Owned / Veteran-Owned / 8(a) / HUBZone / etc.

Part II – Capabilities and Experience:

Please provide a white paper addressing any or all of the following:

• Provide a conceptual cryptographic solution to meet the above key requirements.

• Experience developing NSA-certified cryptographic products.

• Technical approach for automated key management (no manual key fill) and field upgradability.

• Device architecture and integration strategy for drop-in IP encryption and ruggedization.

• Approach to audit logs and device management.

• Production readiness, cost, and scalability (including estimated per-unit cost for lots of 1,000 and monthly production capability).

• Identify any anticipated risk areas and mitigation strategies for meeting the above requirements.

5. RESPONSE INSTRUCTIONS

Vendors who submit information for review do so with the understanding that U.S.

Government personnel as well as their support contractors will review their material and data. Respondents will not be contacted regarding their submission or information gathered as a result of this notice nor the outcome of the Government's review of the solicited information unless the Government desires further information. Submitted information packages will be retained by the Government and not returned to the contractor. Ensure information is marked and sent appropriately if the response is Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). All interested, capable and responsible sources that wish to respond to this RFI are required to electronically supply their responses to:

Zachary Bassett; zachary.bassett.1@us.af.mil Aaron Hoffman; aaron.hoffman.10.ctr@us.af.mil not later than COB 25 Aug 2026. Responses should not exceed 10 pages, excluding brochures or appendices.

6. CONTACT INFORMATION

For questions concerning this announcement, please contact:

Quinella M. Purks, Contracting Officer @ quinella.purks.1@us.af.mil and/or the individuals listed in the above section.

mailto:quinella.purks.1@us.af.mil