CMMC 2.0 Scoping Guidance Limits the Scope of Cybersecurity Assessments
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.23.21
The Department of Defense (DoD) recently released the initial guidance documents for Version 2.0 of its Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) program, including its much-anticipated Scoping Guidance. While the guidance documents generally adhere to the current requirements for the protection of Federal Contract Information (FCI) and Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), the Scoping Guidance includes notable developments. Chief among them is the introduction of two asset categories — “Specialized Assets” and “Contractor Risk Managed Assets” — that could potentially limit the scope of a contractor’s CMMC assessment, as well as the number and types of assets to be assessed against the applicable CMMC practices.
- Specialized Assets include government property; internet of things (IoT) and industrial internet of things (IIoT) devices; operational technology; systems configured based entirely on government requirements and used to support a contract; and test equipment.
- Contractor Risk Managed Assets include computing resources that are capable of handling CUI but are prevented from doing so by the contractor’s security policies, procedures, and practices.
Contractors expecting to be subject to CMMC should carefully review the Scoping Guidance, as well as the other guidance documents, to determine whether and how they may wish to limit the scope of CMMC’s applicability.
Contacts
Partner and Crowell Global Advisors Senior Director
- Washington, D.C.
- D | +1.202.624.2698
- Washington, D.C. (CGA)
- D | +1 202.624.2500
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability
On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
