20141119_ED_501.01_Final_CDSE_Design_Doc.pdf

Final Detailed Design Document Security as an Integral Part of Department of Defense

Programs (ED 501)

Developed for

The Department of Defense (DoD) Defense Security Service (DSS)

Center for Development of Security Excellence (CDSE) Education Division

Presented by

Carney, Inc.

Alexandria, VA

UNDER GSA SCHEDULE MOBIS SIN 874-4

Contract No. GS-02F-0137S

Order No. HS0021-11-F-0137

Oct 5, 2012

DSS CDSE Education Division Security as an Integral Part of Department of Defense Programs

Carney, Inc. Page 2 February 21, 2012

Contents

1 Introduction

1.1 The Requirement

1.2 Purpose of the Detailed Design Document

1.3 Organization of This Document

2 High-Level Course Design

2.1 Course Description/Overview

2.2 Credits Conferred

2.3 Target Audience/Prerequisites

2.4 Student Outcomes/Objectives

2.5 Delivery Method/Course Requirements

2.6 General Course Requirements

2.7 Grading

2.8 Incorporation of Feedback

2.9 Course Textbooks

2.10 Course Outline

3 Content Outline

3.1 Week 1: Course Overview and Role of the Security Generalist

3.2 Week 2: Personnel Security

3.3 Week 3: Physical Security

3.4 Week 4: Information Security

3.5 Week 5: Information System Security

3.6 Week 6: Investigations

3.7 Week 7: Security Management

3.8 Week 8: Industrial Security, Contracting, and SAP/SAR

3.9 Week 9: Force Protection and Antiterrorism

3.10 Week 10: Nuclear Security

3.11 Week 11: Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) and Cyber-security

3.12 Week 12: Acquisition Security and Research and Technology Protection

3.13 Week 13: Security Systems

3.14 Week 14: Integration and Interdependence of Security Systems

3.15 Week 15: Integration of Security Systems into Military Operations

3.16 Week 16: Course Wrap-Up/Future Trends and Issues

Carney, Inc. Page 3 February 21, 2012

1 Introduction

1.1 The Requirement

The Defense Security Service (DSS) Center for Development of Security Excellence (CDSE) has undertaken, through its Education Division, the responsibility to provide graduate-level education to security professionals designed to develop the future security leaders for the Department of Defense (DoD).

The purpose of this project is to design and develop an advanced, semester-long course that will provide an educational opportunity for mid-career security specialists to conduct a comprehensive study of Defense Security as a cross-disciplinary function that supports the missions of DoD commands and agencies. The course will be conducted via the Sakai Continuous Learning Environment (CLE) and will consist of readings, prerecorded lectures and presentations, a discussion forum, written assignments, and midterm and final exams.

1.2 Purpose of the Detailed Design Document

The purpose of this Detailed Design Document is to convey the learning objectives, topic outlines, and planned assignments for each week of the course. It also proposes the grading schema the instructor will use. This document proposes the organization of content to be delivered throughout the 16-week semester and details the proposed instructional methods to be used for each week.

This detailed design will guide the development of the course materials.

1.3 Organization of This Document

The remainder of this Detailed Design Document is organized into several sections:

• Components from of the High-Level Design Document:

o An overview of the course o A statement of the anticipated credits to be conferred o A list of prerequisite courses, if applicable o The terminal learning objectives of the course o The delivery method(s) to be used o General course requirements o Grading scheme for the course o A course outline showing how the course will unfold over the semester

• Content outline detailing the topics, instructional methods, and assignments for each week

Carney, Inc. Page 4 February 21, 2012

2 High-Level Course Design

2.1 Course Description/Overview

Security professionals occupy a unique position within the DoD. They are highly valued for their contributions to national security; yet because of their perceived narrow focus on issues, they are oftentimes relegated to the periphery of organizations and key decisions.

How or where security lands on this scale often depends on the senior civilian or military leadership responsible for advocating and protecting security equities. As with so many things in life, credibility is the key. The higher the degree of professional expertise and credibility a security professional holds, the stronger his or her influence is within an organization.

Accordingly, CDSE has established as a primary goal the development of future security leaders who are adept generalists across the wide range of DoD security responsibilities rather than being focused specialists. To accomplish this goal, CDSE is creating a graduate program in Defense Security Studies, with the Security as an Integral Part of Department of Defense Programs (SIPDDP) course as a cornerstone of the program.

The SIPDDP course is a comprehensive study of defense security as a cross-disciplinary function that supports the missions of DoD commands and agencies. This course will:

1. Address DoD security as a profession, and review the broad scope of disciplines and responsibilities within the security field with an eye toward how these skills and disciplines integrate into a program

2. Provide a strategic perspective on the function of security across disciplines and DoD organizations, establishing a foundation for other courses in the CDSE graduate curriculum

3. Address the emerging role of the multidisciplinary security generalist in contrast to the more narrowly focused security specialist

This is not a “skills” training course. It is a survey of the landscape that makes up DoD security. Because of the amount of material to be covered, no one topic will be covered with enough depth to develop expertise in that topic. Rather, students who may have been exposed only to narrow aspects of security in the past will be introduced to the broader scope of responsibilities that make up the DoD security portfolio.

The course is divided into two distinct parts. The first seven weeks will cover the basic functions and disciplines of DoD security. The remaining weeks will cover other specialty functions in which security professionals find themselves engaged. Through the introduction of new ideas, students will begin to consider how these disparate disciplines integrate into the larger DoD security effort. Consistent themes and questions that will be addressed throughout the course include:

• How does a given security discipline integrate into the effort(s) to protect evolving and advanced technologies? Or does it?

Carney, Inc. Page 5 February 21, 2012

• How does a given security discipline integrate into operational planning? Or does it?

• How does a given security discipline impact the cost of security (both financial and opportunity)? Or does it?

• What vulnerabilities are created or addressed through the practice, or lack thereof, of a given security discipline?

• What threats are present to, or addressed by, a given security discipline?

The primary methods of instruction will be short lectures, readings, student preparation of 1–2 page papers on the readings, and discussions on the issues brought forth in the lectures, readings and papers. Because this class is designed for security professionals with varying levels of expertise in differing security disciplines, it is anticipated that the combined efforts of all class participants will stimulate discussion and the exchange of ideas while driving the learning environment. Accordingly, adequate class preparation will be required to successfully complete this course.

2.2 Credits Conferred

This course will be designed to equate to three credit hours at the graduate level. The American Council on Education (ACE) has not yet reviewed this course to determine credit recommendations. The course will be presented to ACE for CREDIT recommendations in 2012.

2.3 Target Audience/Prerequisites

This course is intended for DoD civilian, and military personnel who perform security leadership and management duties. It is assumed that all students will be prepared to take on graduate-level work in the security field. All students will be required to have achieved the Security Fundamentals Professional Certification (SFPC) under the DoD Security Professional Education Development Program (SPēD).

2.4 Student Outcomes/Objectives

This course will enable students to:

• Analyze, explain and assess the broad scope of disciplines and functions within the DoD security arena

• Examine and analyze critical and emergent issues within the DoD security disciplines and functions

• Assess and analyze the costs and effects of policy decisions on the security program and its interrelationships with other DoD programs

• Identify, analyze and explain the strategic effects of security program success or failure within the DoD

• Assess and summarize the broad scope of competencies of a security generalist

Carney, Inc. Page 6 February 21, 2012

2.5 Delivery Method/Course Requirements

This is a graduate-level distance-learning course in security as an integral part of DoD programs. The course will consist of readings, prerecorded lectures and presentations, participation in the discussion forum, written assignments, and midterm and final exams.

A typical week will include a 45-60 minute prerecorded lecture, with the remainder of the week being dedicated to readings relevant to the week’s topic and a discussion of those readings in the course discussion forum. Students should be prepared to critically discuss and debate the readings as well as analyze them for biases and multiple perspectives.

Though the course covers only one topic per week, students should also be examining how other disciplines relate to the readings and be prepared to discuss this aspect.

The assigned course readings will draw from a variety of resources, such as authoritative readings (legislation, executive orders, policies, plans and strategies, and journals), implementation readings (government products that are responsive to or attempt to fulfill the requirements of authoritative documents), and external reviews (from the U.S.

Government Accountability Office, Congressional Research Service, or other agency or office).

Access to and ability to use a library will be necessary for course completion and success.

When possible, course readings are posted to CiteULike and, in many cases, are available from the DTIC web site. It is recommended that students become acquainted with their local public, university, or DoD (such as the Pentagon or NDU) library. In many cases, these institutions will allow library cardholders remote access to their databases and electronic publications.

2.6 General Course Requirements

Class participation is both important and required. The discussion forum is the classroom.

If a student doesn’t participate in the discussions on a weekly basis then that would be analogous to not showing up to class. As class participation is 25% of the grade (see below), failure to fully participate would make it nearly impossible to pass this course.

If, due to an emergency, students are not able to respond to a discussion prompt in the week it is assigned, they must contact the instructor by e-mail and will be expected to post their response in the following week.

Weekly assignments must be posted in the Sakai CLE by midnight on the day they are due. It is expected that assignments will be submitted on time; however, it is recognized that students occasionally have serious problems that prevent work completion. If such a dilemma arises, students should contact the instructor before the assignment is due.

The completion of all readings assigned for the course is assumed. Since class will be structured around discussion, completion of the readings is crucial to support student participation in the class discussion forum. The majority of the class grade comes from participation and completion of the weekly assignments.

Each lesson will open on Sunday night at midnight and close the following Saturday at midnight. Forum participation (class discussion) must be completed by Thursday at

Carney, Inc. Page 7 February 21, 2012 midnight. If you elect to complete a weekly assignment (7 are due of the course of the semester) it must be turned in no later than midnight on Saturday.

Carney, Inc. Page 8 February 21, 2012

2.7 Grading

The following provides an approximate breakdown of how each assignment contributes to the overall performance in the class.

Category Weight Point Value Class Participation 25% 250 Weekly Assignments 35% 350 Mid Term Exam 20% 200 Final Exam 20% 200 Total 100% 1000

A final letter grade will be assigned following the grading scale below:

Letter Grade Point Range A Range 900 -1000 B Range 800-899 C Range 700-799 D Range 600-699

F 599 and below

Individual graded assignments with a score lower than 80% are acceptable; however, a student’s final grade at the end of the semester must be 80% or higher to pass the course.

Evaluation criteria for each graded assignment, including the midterm and final exams, are listed below. Any assignment that receives a failing grade can be resubmitted within the following two weeks, but there will be no further extensions beyond this two-week period.

Assignment Evaluation Criteria A Range B Range C Range D Range F

Content Analysis and integration subject matter (readings, lecture, discussion, personal experience, etc.) is clear and convincing

Analysis and integration subject matter is clear and effective

Analysis and integration subject matter is underdeveloped

Analysis and integration subject matter is unsophisticated

Did not complete assignment

Organization Paper shows exceptionally clear organization, purpose and focus

Paper shows good organization, purpose and focus

Paper lacks clear organization, purpose and focus

Paper is disorganized and confusing

Carney, Inc. Page 9 February 21, 2012

Assignment Evaluation Criteria A Range B Range C Range D Range F

Grammar Free of most grammatical errors

Some grammatical mistakes but generally shows successful grammar usage

Frequent grammatical errors

Appropriate grammatical knowledge not displayed for current language level

Did not complete assignment

Overall Effect A strong overall effect with clear communication and support

A good overall effect with some support and adequate clarity

Paper struggles overall and does not give a coherent message

Paper has a poor overall effect and does not fulfill assignment

Timeliness Assignment turned in on time

Assignment turned in on time

Assignment turned in on time

Assignment turned in on time

2.7.1 Class Participation (25%):

Participation includes completing all assigned readings, participating in the class discussion forum, participating in class exercises, and reflecting on the class experience.

To achieve full credit for participation, students must attend, participate, and reflect.

They must respond thoughtfully to all weekly discussion prompts, post responses to at least two other students’ discussion posts each week, and provide constructive criticism when conducting peer reviews of other students’ writing. Posts and responses should reflect a depth of critical thought and analysis on the subject at hand. Simply posting “I agree” or other such responses will not be deemed sufficient.

As mentioned earlier weekly participation in the on line discussion forum must be completed no later than midnight on the Saturday of the weekly lesson. Questions for discussion and participation requirements will be posted weekly in Saki

2.7.2 Weekly Assignments (35%):

Produce a 500-1000 word (1-2 typewritten pages) critical analysis of the week’s topic.

The object of the assignment is to challenge your thinking on the subject and to develop new perspectives. You are free to write the paper as you see fit, however you may want to consider one of the following approaches.

• Focus on how the readings relate to the week’s lesson and how your experience(s) influence or impact the topic. It is not necessary to integrate all of the readings into your paper, but you can if you like.

• Write to one or more of the lesson’s objectives and integrate any timely information and/or how the topic fits into the larger security realm writ large.

• Focus your writing on an issue or problem in the topic of the week and describe how you would approach addressing or fixing the issue/problem. It’s not enough to talk about what’s broken rather you should not only describe the problem but what steps need or should be taken to correct the problem

Carney, Inc. Page 10

There are fourteen weekly assignments. Learners will be responsible for completing seven of these assignments during the course of the semester. Each paper is worth fifty points and will be graded using the pass/fail criteria noted above. Learners may select what assignments they complete. All assignments need to be completed by week 15 if you are to get full credit for this area. As noted earlier, papers are due no later than midnight on the Saturday of the weekly lesson.

2.7.3 Midterm Exam (20%):

The course midterm exam will be distributed in Week 8 and will be due during Week 9.

It will cover material from Weeks 1 through 7 of class. The objective of the exam is to measure student performance relative to the course objectives. The midterm exam will consist of no more than five essay questions from which students will prepare three responses. Written communication, critical thinking skills, and integration of class material into the essay responses will demonstrate mastery of the subject.

The midterm exam will be graded using the pass/fail criteria noted above and/or other instructions provided to students for this exam.

2.7.4 Final Exam (20%):

The course final exam will be distributed in Week 15 and will be due during Week 16.

The objective of the exam is to measure student performance relative to the course objectives. It will cover material from weeks 8 through 15 of class and will consist of no more than seven essay questions from which students will prepare five responses. Written communication, critical thinking skills, and integration of class material into the essay responses will demonstrate mastery of the subject.

2.8 Incorporation of Feedback

The course instructor will provide multiple opportunities for students to provide constructive feedback on course delivery and content over the period of the course.

Students will be afforded the opportunity to provide written feedback following each assignment, to include general feedback on the course or specific feedback on an individual assignment. Online feedback is also encouraged throughout the course, either through e-mail or through the course discussion forum. Finally, the instructor will provide written feedback to the students on all assignments.

2.9 Course Textbooks

The bulk of the readings for this course will draw from a variety of resources, such as authoritative readings (legislation, executive orders, policies, plans and strategies, and journals), implementation readings (government products that are responsive to or attempt to fulfill the requirements of authoritative documents), and external reviews (from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, Congressional Research Service, or

Carney, Inc. Page 11 February 21, 2012 other agency or office).

Supplemental readings may be selected from the following texts:

Fay, John J. Contemporary Security Management, 3rd Edition. Boston: Elsevier Inc., 2011.

Sennewald, Charles A. Effective Security Management, 5th Edition. Boston: Elsevier Inc., 2011.

Additional But Not Required Texts for ED 501

Schneier, Bruce. Beyond Fear. Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World.

Springer, 2006.

The Chicago Manual of Style. 16th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.

2.10 Course Outline

The following table outlines the 16-week course agenda. Graded assignments are in bold.

Items in italics are ungraded but are required for a later, graded assignment.

Week Topics Instructional Method(s)

Student Assignments Due

1 Course Overview • Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum:

Introduction

2 Personnel Security Including cleared and un-cleared personnel

• Reading

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 1

3 Physical Security • Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 2

4 Information Security And Protection of unclassified information And OPSEC

• Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 3

5 COMSEC and Information System Security

• Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 4

Carney, Inc. Page 12 February 21, 2012

Week Topics Instructional Method(s)

Student Assignments Due

6 Investigations • Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 5

7 Security Management • Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 6

• Midterm Exam

Assigned 8 Industrial Security and

SAP/SAR

And contracting

• Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion Forum

• Midterm Exam Due

• Assignment 7

9 Force Protection and Anti-Terrorism

• Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 8

10 Nuclear Security

• Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 9

11 Critical Infrastructure Protection And Cybersecurity

• Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 10

12 Acquisition Security and Research & Technology Protection

• Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 11

13 Security Systems • Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 12

14 Integration of Security Disciplines

• Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 13

15 Integration of Security Disciplines & Integrating Security into operations

• Reading

• Asynchronous presentation

• Discussion

• Discussion Forum

• Assignment 14

• Final Exam Assigned

Carney, Inc. Page 13 February 21, 2012

Week Topics Instructional Method(s)

Student Assignments Due

16 Course Wrap Up/Future Trends and Issues

• Discussion • Discussion Forum

• Final Exam Due

Carney, Inc. Page 14 February 21, 2012

3 Content Outline

3.1 Week 1: Course Overview and Role of the Security Generalist

1. Lesson Goals/Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, learners will be able to:

• Describe the scope of the course, administrative requirements, instructional methodology, evaluation criteria, and feedback processes

• Describe the role of the security generalist

• Distinguish between a security specialist and generalist

• Assess their current progress towards becoming a security generalist

2. Rationale:

This class aims to introduce and review the concept of the security generalist and establish the overall motivation for this course.

3. Discussion Questions:

• Is there a difference between a security specialist and generalist?

• What qualities should a security generalist have?

• Knowledge-wise, what’s better? To be a mile wide and an inch deep or a mile deep and an inch wide?

• Do you have to, or for that matter, can you, be an expert in all areas?

• If you were going to build a security generalist, how would you do it?

4. Class Agenda:

Activity Duration Review the syllabus and course requirements

60 minutes

Role of the security generalist lecture 20 minutes Discussion 40 minutes Total 120 minutes

[Note: These estimated durations will be further refined as the instructor proceeds with course materials development.]

5. In-Class Activity: Discussion

In this activity, the class will analyze and evaluate the role of the security generalist. The goal of this activity is to illustrate and summarize the role of the security generalist and to have learners begin to devise a roadmap towards becoming a security generalist.

Carney, Inc. Page 15 February 21, 2012

6. Required Reading:

Beaumont, Keaton L. “Developing 21st Century Senior Leaders,” U.S. Army War

College (2010). http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army-usawc/dev_21c_leaders.pdf.

Bush, Charles D. “Logistics Generalist Development,” U.S. Army War College (1987).

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA180427.

Dror, Yehezkel. “Specialists vs. Generalists – A Mis Question.” Rand Corporation (1968). http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD0680695.

Lendaro, V. L. “A new Approach to Officer Development,” Marine Corps Command and Staff College (2008). http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA491610.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security. “TSA Success Profile.”

http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/afsd_generalist_career_guide.pdf.

7. Additional Recommended Reading:

American Society for Industrial Security. “The ASIS Foundation Security Report: Scope and Emerging Trends.” http://lepsc.org/documents/ASIS-Fndn- ScopeandEmergingTrends.pdf.

Drew, Christopher T. “Critical Thinking and the Development of Innovative Problem Solvers,” Naval War College (2005). http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA464378.

Kelly, Monroe. “Certifications for the Security Professional.”

http://bethanyduggan.wordpress.com/executive-protection-what-is-executive-protection/certifications-for-the-security-professional-by-monroe-kelly/.

Wilcock, Lawrence C. “Navy Intelligence Officer Detailing: A Case for Specialization.”

Marine Corps Command and Staff College (2010). http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA534928.

8. Deliverables for this Week:

None

9. Assignment for Next Time - Take-home Assignment #1:

• Produce a 500-1000 word (1-2 typewritten pages) critical analysis of next week’s topic. The object of the assignment is to challenge your thinking on the subject and to develop new perspectives. You are free to write the paper as you see fit, however you may want to consider one of the following approaches.

o Focus on how the readings relate to the week’s lesson and how your experience(s) influence or impact the topic. It is not necessary to integrate all of the readings into your paper, but you can if you like.

Carney, Inc. Page 16 February 21, 2012 o Write to one or more of the lesson’s objectives and integrate any timely information and/or how the topic fits into the larger security realm writ large.

o Focus your writing on an issue or problem in the topic of the week and describe how you would approach addressing or fixing the issue/problem.

It’s not enough to talk about what’s broken rather you should not only describe the problem but what steps need or should be taken to correct the problem

3.2 Week 2: Personnel Security

1. Lesson Goals/Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, learners will be able to:

• Assess and analyze threats and vulnerabilities to the personnel security system

• Assess and explain the value of adjudication guidelines

• Summarize current personnel security issues

• Analyze the current and future need to vet personnel who do not have clearances

• Evaluate and describe how personnel security is related to other security disciplines and specialties

Personnel security is one of the core competencies of a security professional.

Additionally, the granting and maintenance of a security clearance is one of the highest trusts the U.S. Government places upon its citizens.

• What threat, if any, do non-U.S. born citizens pose to the personnel security system?

• What vulnerability, if any, do non-U.S. born citizens pose to the personnel security system?

• In a post-9/11 world are adjudication guidelines sufficient to meet current and projected threats and vulnerabilities?

• Is the personnel security system timely enough to support the operational planning cycle?

• What systems exist to deal with vetting and security of personnel who do not have clearances? Do these systems meet the current and future needs of DoD?

• How are personnel security requirements related to information security, physical security, industrial security, COMSEC, information systems security, force protection, and other security disciplines and specialty areas?

• How does the personnel security system impact cost?

Carney, Inc. Page 17

Personnel security lecture 60 minutes Discussion 60 minutes

Carney, Inc. Page 18 February 21, 2012

5. In-Class Activity: Discussion:

Learners will use online forums to discuss the readings for this session. Instructor- and learner-provided questions will form the framework of the discussion.

6. Required Reading:

Fay, John J. Contemporary Security Management, 3rd Edition. Boston: Elsevier Inc., 2011. Chapter 14.

Herbig, Katherine L. “Allegiance in a Time of Globalization.” Defense Personnel Security Research Center (2008). http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/reports/tr08- 10.pdf.

Herbig, Katherine L. “Changes in Espionage by Americans: 1947-2007.” Defense Personnel Research Center (2008). http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/changes.pdf.

Heuer Jr., Richards J. and Janice L. Condo, “Summary and Explanation of Changes to the Adjudicative Guidelines Approved by the President December 29, 2005.”

Defense Personnel Security Research Center (2006).

http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/reports/mr06-02.pdf.

Kramer, Lisa A., Richards J. Heuer Jr., and Kent S. Crawford. “Technological, Social and Economic Trends That Are Increasing U.S. Vulnerability to Insider Espionage.”

Defense Personnel Research Center (2005).

http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/reports/tr05-10.pdf.

Shaw, Eric D., and Lynn F. Fischer, “Ten Tales of Betrayal: The Threat to Corporate

Infrastructures by Information Technology Insiders Analysis and Observations.”

Defense Personnel Security Research Center (2005).

http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/reports/tr05-13.pdf.

Take-home Assignment #1

9. Assignment for Next Time - Take-home Assignment #2:

and to develop new perspectives. You are free to write the paper as you see fit, however you may want to consider one of the following approaches.

o Focus on how the readings relate to the week’s lesson and how your

Carney, Inc. Page 19 February 21, 2012 o Write to one or more of the lesson’s objectives and integrate any timely information and/or how the topic fits into the larger security realm writ large.

o Focus your writing on an issue or problem in the topic of the week and describe how you would approach addressing or fixing the issue/problem.

It’s not enough to talk about what’s broken rather you should not only describe the problem but what steps need or should be taken to correct the problem

Carney, Inc. Page 20 February 21, 2012

3.3 Week 3: Physical Security

1. Lesson Goals/Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, learners will be able to:

• Examine DoD physical security policy and evaluate its effectiveness against a given problem/issue

• Assess the executability of a given physical security policy

• Identify an emerging physical security issue and select physical security policies to address the issue

• Evaluate and describe how physical security is related to other security disciplines and specialties

2. Rationale:

Physical security is another core competency of the security professional. This lesson explores DoD physical security policy and its executability.

• What threat, if any, exists to physical security systems and/or policy?

• What vulnerability, if any, exists with respect to physical security systems and/or policy?

• Is HSPD-12 executable? If so, or if not, how and/or why?

• DTM 09-012 places a significant requirement on the services. Is this requirement executable?

• If each service has a differing opinion on meeting the requirement of DTM 09-

012, how do you get there from here?

• What is your proposal for paying for DTM 09-012 requirements?

• How are physical security requirements related to information security, personnel security, industrial security, COMSEC, information systems security, force protection, and other security disciplines and specialty areas?

Physical security lecture 60 minutes

Carney, Inc. Page 21 February 21, 2012

5. In-Class Activity: Discussion:

Learners will use online forums to discuss the readings for this session. Instructor- and learner-provided questions will form the framework of the discussion.

6. Required Reading:

Department of Defense. ”Physical Security Program, 5200.8-R.” (2007).

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/520008r.pdf.

Department of Defense. “Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 09-012, Interim Policy Guidance for DoD Physical Access Control.” (2009).

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/DTM-09-012.pdf.

Department of Homeland Security. “Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12: Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors.”

(2004). http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/laws/gc_1217616624097.shtm#1.

Fay, John J. Contemporary Security Management, 3rd Edition. Boston: Elsevier Inc., 2011. Chapters 11 and 12.

Department of Defense Inspector General. “DoD IG Report to Congress on Section 357 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 Review of Physical Security of DoD Installations Report No. D-2009-035.” (2009).

http://www.dodig.mil/audit/reports/fy09/09-035.pdf.

Department of Defense Education Activity. “Internal Physical Security, DoDEA Regulation 4700.2.” (2001). http://www.dodea.edu/foia/iod/pdf/4700_2.pdf.

Department of Homeland Security. “Interagency Security Committee Use of Physical Security Performance Measures.” (2009).

http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/isc_physical_security_performance_measures.

pdf.

Take-Home Assignment #2

9. Assignment for Next Time: Take-home assignment #3:

and to develop new perspectives. You are free to write the paper as you see fit, however you may want to consider one of the following approaches.

o Focus on how the readings relate to the week’s lesson and how your

Carney, Inc. Page 22 February 21, 2012 o Write to one or more of the lesson’s objectives and integrate any timely information and/or how the topic fits into the larger security realm writ large.

o Focus your writing on an issue or problem in the topic of the week and describe how you would approach addressing or fixing the issue/problem.

It’s not enough to talk about what’s broken rather you should not only

Carney, Inc. Page 23 February 21, 2012

3.4 Week 4: Information Security

1. Lesson Goals/Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, learners will be able to:

• Examine and analyze a given Information Security issue in light of DoD policy

• Develop and explain a response to a given Information Security issue.

• Identify and analyze current Information Security and issues

• Evaluate and describe how Information Security is related to other security disciplines and specialties

2. Rationale:

Information Security is another core competency of the security professional. This lesson explores DoD Information Security policy and current issues impacting these disciplines.

• What threat, if any, is there to Information Security?

• What vulnerability, if any, with respect to Information Security?

• How does Information Security impact cost?

• Is DoD policy sufficient to address current Information Security issues? If so, how? If not, why not?

• What issues need to be addressed by DoD regarding the protection of unclassified information?

• What about criminal trials where the defense requests access to classified information? What now?

• How are information security requirements related to physical security, personnel security, industrial security, COMSEC, information systems security, force protection, and other security disciplines and specialty areas?

Information security and COMSEC lecture 60 minutes

Carney, Inc. Page 24 February 21, 2012

5. In-Class Activity: Discussion:

Learners will use online forums to discuss the readings for this session. Instructor- and learner-provided questions will form the framework of the discussion.

6. Required Reading:

Department of Defense. ”Information Security Program and Protection of Sensitive

Compartmented Information, 5200.1.” (2008).

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/520001p.pdf.

Department of Defense. “DoD Operations Security (OPSEC) Program, 5205.02.” (2006).

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/520502p.pdf.

Fay, John J. Contemporary Security Management, 3rd Edition. Boston: Elsevier Inc., 2011. Chapter 21.

Federal Register. “Controlled Unclassified Information, Executive Order 13556.” (2010).

http://www.archives.gov/isoo/policy-documents/eo-13556.pdf.

Liu, Edward C, and Todd Garvey. “Protecting Classified Information and the Rights of Criminal Defendants: The Classified Information Procedures Act.” Congressional Research Service (2011). http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/R41742_20110331.pdf.

Lynch, Jennifer and Trevor Timm. “The Dangers in Classifying the News.” Electronic Frontier Foundation (October 2011).

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/10/dangers-classifying-news.

8. Deliverables for Today:

Take-Home Assignment #3

9. Assignment for Next Time: Take-home Assignment #4:

• Produce a 500-1000 word (1-2 typewritten pages) critical analysis of next week’s topic. The object of the assignment is to challenge your thinking on the subject and to develop new perspectives. You are free to write the paper as you see fit, however you may want to consider one of the following approaches.

o Focus on how the readings relate to the week’s lesson and how your experience(s) influence or impact the topic. It is not necessary to integrate all of the readings into your paper, but you can if you like.

o Write to one or more of the lesson’s objectives and integrate any timely information and/or how the topic fits into the larger security realm writ large.

Carney, Inc. Page 25 February 21, 2012 o Focus your writing on an issue or problem in the topic of the week and describe how you would approach addressing or fixing the issue/problem.

It’s not enough to talk about what’s broken rather you should not only

Carney, Inc. Page 26 February 21, 2012

3.5 Week 5: Information System Security

1. Lesson Goals/Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, learners will be able to:

• Analyze DoD Information System Security and COMSEC policy

• Describe and assess threats and vulnerabilities to DoD information systems

• Describe and assess threats and vulnerabilities to DoD communications systems

• Formulate strategies to combat threats to information systems

• Evaluate and describe how Information Systems Security and COMSEC are related to other security disciplines and specialties

2. Rationale:

Information System Security and COMSEC are specialty areas that every DoD security professional must be conversant in. This lesson explores DoD Information System Security and COMSEC policy and current issues impacting these specialty areas.

• What threat, if any, is there to Information Systems?

• What threats are there to DoD communications?

• What vulnerabilities, if any, exist with respect to Information System?

• What vulnerabilities exist in DoD communications?

• How does Information System Security impact cost?

• How does COMSEC impact cost?

• Is DoD policy sufficient to address current Information System Security and

COMSEC issues? If so, how? If not, why not?

• Is Information System Security a stand-alone discipline? If so, how? If not, why?

What level of computer expertise do you believe is required to be proficient in this area?

• How are information systems security and COMSEC requirements related to physical security, information security, personnel security, industrial security, force protection, and other security disciplines and specialty areas?

Information system security lecture 60 minutes

Carney, Inc. Page 27 February 21, 2012

5. In-Class Activity: Discussion:

Learners will use online forums to discuss the readings for this session. Instructor- and learner-provided questions will form the framework of the discussion.

6. Required Reading:

Department of Defense. “Information Assurance (IA) 8500.1E.” (2002).

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/850001p.pdf.

Department of Defense. “Communications Security (COMSEC), 8523.01. (2008).

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/852301p.pdf.

Elmhirst, Sophie, “Bradley Manning, The Unknown Soldier.” New Statesman. (March 2011). http://www.newstatesman.com/north-america/2011/03/manning-house-held-base-iraq.

Fay, John J. Contemporary Security Management, 3rd Edition. Boston: Elsevier Inc., 2011. Chapters 16 and 17.

Khatchadourian, Raffi. “No Secrets.” The New Yorker. (June 2010).

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian.

Department of Defense. “Management of the Department of Defense Information

Enterprise 8000.1.” (2009).

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/800001p.pdf.

Director of National Intelligence. “United States Intelligence Community Information Sharing Strategy.” 2008.

http://www.dni.gov/reports/IC_Information_Sharing_Strategy.pdf.

Luo, Xin and Merrill Warkentin. “Assessment of Information Security Spending and Costs of Failure.” Mississippi State University. http://www.information-institute.org/security/3rdConf/Proceedings/96.pdf.

The Joint Staff. “Joint Communications Systems, Joint Publication 6-0.” (2006).

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp6_0.pdf.

8. Deliverables for Today:

Take-Home Assignment #4

Carney, Inc. Page 28 February 21, 2012

9. Assignment for Next Time: Take-home Assignment #5:

• Produce a 500-1000 word (1-2 typewritten pages) critical analysis of next week’s topic. The object of the assignment is to challenge your thinking on the subject and to develop new perspectives. You are free to write the paper as you see fit, however you may want to consider one of the following approaches.

o Focus on how the readings relate to the week’s lesson and how your experience(s) influence or impact the topic. It is not necessary to integrate all of the readings into your paper, but you can if you like.

o Write to one or more of the lesson’s objectives and integrate any timely information and/or how the topic fits into the larger security realm writ large.

o Focus your writing on an issue or problem in the topic of the week and describe how you would approach addressing or fixing the issue/problem.

It’s not enough to talk about what’s broken rather you should not only

Carney, Inc. Page 29 February 21, 2012

3.6 Week 6: Investigations

1. Lesson Goals/Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, learners will be able to:

• Assess the effectiveness of a polygraph program

• Design and conduct an administrative investigation

• Identify key investigative case law

• Evaluate and describe how investigations are related to other security disciplines and specialties.

2. Rationale:

A DoD security professional must conduct several different types of investigations. This lesson explores policy and current issues impacting how investigations are conducted.

• What are the differences between Kalkines and Garrity rights?

• Miranda rights and Privacy Act play into this how?

• You’ve been assigned an administrative investigation…now what?

• Is a polygraph a useful tool? If so how, if not why?

• What type of polygraph policy would you construct for an agency?

• How are investigations related to physical security, personnel security, information security, industrial security, COMSEC, information systems security, Investigations lecture 60 minutes

5. In-Class Activity: Discussion:

Learners will use online forums to discuss the readings for this session. Instructor- and learner-provided questions will form the framework of the discussion.

Carney, Inc. Page 30 February 21, 2012

6. Required Reading:

Department of Defense. “Polygraph and Credibility Assessment Program, 5210.91”

(2007). http://www.dodig.mil/Inspections/ipo/Pdfs/DoDD_5210.48.pdf .

Department of Defense. “Polygraph and Credibility Assessment Procedures, 5210.48.”

(2010). http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/521091p.pdf.

Fay, John J. Contemporary Security Management, 3rd Edition. Boston: Elsevier Inc., 2011. Chapter 13.

Franey, Dave and Steve Seaton. Administrative Investigations.” (2008).

http://www.cpms.osd.mil/ASSETS/65B4785282114B44BE51AA94D96280D9/A dministratively%20Acceptable%20Evidence%20to%20Document%20Sick%20L eave.pdf.

Gilson, Bob. “Conducting Administrative Investigations and Writing Reports.” (2007).

http://www.cpms.osd.mil/ASSETS/3BF55E95FAF846A887AAD96C277B7D7F/ ConductingAdministrativeInvestigationsPrintVersion.pdf.

Navarro, Joe and John R. Schafer. “Detecting Deception.” FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. (2001). http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/decep_detect_01.pdf.

Department of Justice. “Use of Polygraph Examinations in the Department of Justice.”

(2006). http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/polygraph/dojpoly.pdf.

Naval Justice School. “JAGMAN Investigations Handbook.” (2001).

http://www.imef.usmc.mil/mlg/specialstaffsections/SJA/investigations/JAGMAN %20INVESTIGATIONS%20HANDBOOK%20(Feb.%2001).pdf.

Navarro, Joe and John R. Schafer. “Detecting Deception.” FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. (2001). http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/decep_detect_01.pdf.

Rossmo, D. Kim, “Criminal Investigative Failures.” Center for Geospatial Intelligence and Investigation, Department of Criminal Justice, Texas State University.

(2005).

http://www.justice.gov.sk.ca/milgaard/pubdocs/04262006/Kim%20Rossmo/3376 74.pdf.

Take-Home Assignment #5

9. Assignment for Next Time: Take-Home Assignment #6:

• Produce a 500-1000 word (1-2 typewritten pages) critical analysis of next week’s topic. The object of the assignment is to challenge your thinking on the subject and to develop new perspectives. You are free to write the paper as you see fit, however you may want to consider one of the following approaches.

Carney, Inc. Page 31 February 21, 2012 o Focus on how the readings relate to the week’s lesson and how your experience(s) influence or impact the topic. It is not necessary to integrate all of the readings into your paper, but you can if you like.

o Write to one or more of the lesson’s objectives and integrate any timely information and/or how the topic fits into the larger security realm writ large.

o Focus your writing on an issue or problem in the topic of the week and describe how you would approach addressing or fixing the issue/problem.

It’s not enough to talk about what’s broken rather you should not only

Carney, Inc. Page 32 February 21, 2012

3.7 Week 7: Security Management

1. Lesson Goals/Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, learners will be able to:

• Describe the strategic impact of security

• Relate military leadership principles to a security organization

• Assess the value placed on security within an organization

• Describe the role of security leader/manager

• Assess the effectiveness of a security program

• Evaluate and discuss how a security manager must balance resource allocations across security disciplines and specialty areas to address all security requirements

2. Rationale:

Security Management is a significant responsibility of the security professional. This lesson explores Security Management.

• Does the manager/leader need to know everything?

• Beyond basic security competency, what skills/qualities should a security manager/leader have?

• How do you manage/lead a team that is geographically separated?

• What access should you as a security manager have?

• How do you evaluate the success or failure of a security program?

• How should a manager balance resource allocations to ensure that all security disciplines and specialty areas can function effectively and meet requirements?

Security Management lecture 60 minutes

5. In-Class Activity: Discussion:

Learners will use online forums to discuss the readings for this session. Instructor- and

6. Required Reading:

Carney, Inc. Page 33 February 21, 2012

Fay, John J. Contemporary Security Management, 3rd Edition. Boston: Elsevier Inc., 2011. Chapters 3, 4 and 23..

Marine Corps Leadership Principles.”

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usmc/leadership.htm.

Sennewald, Charles A. Effective Security Management, 5th Edition. Boston: Elsevier Inc, 2011. Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4 and 16.

Dess, Gregory G, G.T. Lumpkin and Marilyn L. Taylor. “Defining Strategic

Management.” Strategic Management. 2nd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin, 2005.

http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/publications/strategic_management/pdf/01.pdf

Madden, Jerry. “100 Lessons Learned for Project Managers,” National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (2005).

http://askmagazine.nasa.gov/issues/14/practices/ask14_lessons_madden.html.

Take-Home Assignment #6

9. Assignment for Next Time: Take-Home Assignment #7:

and to develop new perspectives. You are free to write the paper as you see fit, however you may want to consider one of the following approaches.

o Focus on how the readings relate to the week’s lesson and how your experience(s) influence or impact the topic. It is not necessary to integrate all of the readings into your paper, but you can if you like.

o Write to one or more of the lesson’s objectives and integrate any timely information and/or how the topic fits into the larger security realm writ large.

o Focus your writing on an issue or problem in the topic of the week and describe how you would approach addressing or fixing the issue/problem.

It’s not enough to talk about what’s broken rather you should not only describe the problem but what steps need or should be taken to correct the

• Mid Term Exam

Carney, Inc. Page 34 February 21, 2012

3.8 Week 8: Industrial Security, Contracting, and SAP/SAR

1. Lesson Goals/Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, learners will be able to:

• Summarize the structure and provisions of the National Industrial Security Program

• Discuss ways that security-related requirements can be included in both classified and unclassified contracts

• Analyze and assess the need for a SAP/SAR program

• Analyze and assess the effectiveness of an Industrial Security program

• Develop security strategies for Industrial Security and SAP/SAR programs

• Evaluate and describe how industrial security, contracting and SAP/SAR security are related to information security, physical security, personnel security and other security disciplines and specialty areas

Having covered the core competencies of a security professional, this lesson begins the shift into disciplines that build off of the core competencies.

• What threats, if any, do Industrial Security and SAP/SAR programs encounter?

• What vulnerabilities, if any, exist with respect to Industrial Security and

SAP/SAR programs?

• Is foreign ownership of a company a…