1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |No Post-Thanksgiving Break for Cyber – DoD and NIST Publish New Guidance

No Post-Thanksgiving Break for Cyber – DoD and NIST Publish New Guidance

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.01.17

Both the Department of Defense and National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) have put pen to paper and provided new information for contractors looking to comply with DFARS 252.204-7012 and its accompanying cybersecurity requirements under NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-171.  Earlier this week, the DoD posted guidance explaining that contractors can still use system security plans (SSPs) under the original version of NIST SP 800-171 to “document implementation” under the DFARS Clause, despite that version not including SSPs as a security control requirement.  Separately, NIST published a draft of NIST SP 800-171A, Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information, providing guidance to both contractors and their customers regarding how to conduct assessments under NIST SP 800-171.  Importantly, the draft is open to comment through December 27, 2017, providing contractors with a unique opportunity to weigh in on how their customers may ultimately judge compliance with the DFARS Clause’s security requirements.


Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 10.30.26

Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right: GAO Sustains Protest Where Agency Tried to Fix PIA Violation with a Second PIA Violation

Recent sustain decisions by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC and Reliance Test & Technology send a clear message: when an agency tries to fix a Procurement Integrity Act (PIA) violation by committing a second one, the cure can be just as fatal as the disease. The cases involved the U.S. Air Force’s $1.8 billion procurement for O&M services at Elgin Air Force Base. During discussions, the Air Force inadvertently released a pricing overview slide with all offerors’ bottom-line evaluated costs to Reliance Test & Technology, which immediately notified the agency of the error. In response, the Air Force decided to level the playing field by providing the same information to all the other offerors in the procurement, stating, “[o]fferors may consider this disclosure in their [final proposal revision].”...