DOCSLIB.ORG

New York State Cybersecurity and Homeland Security Industry Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
New York State Cybersecurity and Homeland Security Industry Study New York State Cybersecurity and Homeland Security Industry Study Confidential Prepared For: New York State Economic Development Council Attention: Ryan Silva Executive Director July 2019 k2intelligence.com New York · London · Madrid · Geneva · Los Angeles Restricted Use Warning This report was prepared by K2 Intelligence at the request of the client to whom it is furnished ("Client"). The Client acknowledges and agrees that this report and information received from K2 Intelligence (collectively, the "Report"), is being provided solely with respect to the Services defined in, and subject to the Client's compliance with, the terms and conditions of the Professional Services Agreement ("PSA") and is intended for the Client's use consistent with the terms of the PSA; provided that nothing in this Report shall be considered legal, business, regulatory, investment, financial, insurance or accounting advice, opinions, endorsements, recommendations or the like. Any other use and any reliance upon or communication, disclosure, publication, or reproduction of the Report in any portion thereof without the prior written consent of K2 Intelligence is strictly forbidden. The Report may rely upon third party and public information that has not been verified for accuracy, completeness, or otherwise by K2 Intelligence. As set forth in the PSA, the Client agrees to indemnify and hold harmless K2 Intelligence against any damages and liabilities resulting from unauthorized use of the Report, or the Client's or any third party's reliance thereon. K2 Intelligence assumes no obligation to inform the Client of any facts, circumstances, events, or changes that may hereafter be brought to its attention regardless of whether or not they may alter, affect or modify the information contained in the Report. Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary .............................................................................................. 4 2. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 9 2.1. Key Definitions ............................................................................................................... 9 Cluster ...................................................................................................................... 9 Industries .................................................................................................................. 9 3. Methodology ........................................................................................................ 11 4. Strength of Homeland Security & Cybersecurity Markets ................................ 12 4.1. The Cybersecurity Market ............................................................................................ 12 4.2. The Homeland Security Market ................................................................................... 13 4.3. Market Futures ............................................................................................................. 14 5. Factors Driving Cluster Development ................................................................ 15 5.1. Talent: Access to Talent Drives Location Decisions .................................................... 15 5.2. Customers: Face-to-Face Meetings Still Critical ......................................................... 16 5.3. Economic Incentives: Government Spending Only Goes So Far ................................ 17 6. Fast-Growing Regional Clusters ........................................................................ 18 6.1. San Antonio, Texas...................................................................................................... 18 Proximity to Federal Government Resources ........................................................ 19 Academic Institutions & Public-Private Partnerships ............................................. 20 Economic Incentives .............................................................................................. 20 Challenges to Growth ............................................................................................. 21 6.2. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ............................................................................................. 21 Proximity to Federal Government Resources ........................................................ 22 Academic Institutions & Public-Private Partnerships ............................................. 22 Economic Incentives .............................................................................................. 23 Challenges to Growth ............................................................................................. 23 6.3. Colorado Springs, Colorado ........................................................................................ 24 Proximity to Federal Government Resources ........................................................ 25 Academic Institutions & Public-Private Partnerships ............................................. 25 Economic Incentives .............................................................................................. 26 Challenges to Growth ............................................................................................. 27 6.4. Augusta, Georgia ......................................................................................................... 28 Proximity to Federal Government Resources ........................................................ 28 Academic Institutions & Public-Private Partnerships ............................................. 29 Economic Incentives .............................................................................................. 30 Challenges to Growth ............................................................................................. 30 Privileged and Confidential 1 7. The New York State Landscape ......................................................................... 31 7.1. Tier One ....................................................................................................................... 31 New York City ........................................................................................................ 32 Mohawk Valley Region ........................................................................................... 33 Central New York Region ....................................................................................... 36 7.2. Tier Two ....................................................................................................................... 38 Capital Region ........................................................................................................ 38 Finger Lakes Region .............................................................................................. 40 Long Island Region ................................................................................................ 43 Western New York Region ..................................................................................... 45 8. New York Challenges .......................................................................................... 48 8.1. National Shortage of Cybersecurity Talent .................................................................. 48 8.2. Pessimism about Upstate New York ........................................................................... 48 Perception That Quality of Life Upstate Lags Behind New York City ..................... 49 Lack of Transportation to Major Urban Centers ..................................................... 49 Customer Education Required in Upstate New York ............................................. 50 New York State’s Corporate Tax Structures are a Disincentive ............................. 50 9. New York State’s Strengths ................................................................................ 52 9.1. Market Share Argument ............................................................................................... 52 Location of Major Industries Drives Demand ......................................................... 52 New York’s Unique Threat Landscape ................................................................... 53 New York’s Economic Clout – A Force Multiplier ................................................... 55 9.2. Diversity of Talent Pool ................................................................................................ 56 9.3. Affordable Cost of Living and Talent ............................................................................ 56 9.4. Potential to Expand Existing Hotspots ......................................................................... 57 10. Development Opportunities ............................................................................... 59 10.1. State-Sponsored Technology Testbed ........................................................................ 59 10.2. Apprenticeship Laboratory ........................................................................................... 59 10.3. Leveraged Purchasing Power ...................................................................................... 59 10.4. Star Power ................................................................................................................... 60 10.5. Cultural Re-Branding ................................................................................................... 60 10.6. Tax Credits & Other Economic Incentives ..................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Report of the National Security Agency Texas Cryptologic Center
    UNCLASSIFIED/fFOR OFFIOb9tL UOE ONLY UNCLASSIFIED/JFOR OFFIGIAL UOE OPJL¥ UNCLASS.IFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE OPJLY INSPECTOR GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 400 ARMY NAVY DRIVE ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22202-2884 December 3, 2010 MEMORANDUM FOR COMMANDER, UNITED STATES PACIFIC COMMAND DIRECTOR, NAT.fONAL SECURJTY AGENCY/CHIEF CENTRAL SECURITYSERVICE COMMANDER, UNITED STATES ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERS SUBJECT: (U//fOUO) Report ofthe National Security Agency Texas Cryptologic Center Construction Project (Report No. I I -fNTEL-02). (U//fi'8H8) Background: This review was conducted as part of our audit of the National Security Agency (NSA) Cryptologic Center construction projects. This report focuses on the National Security Agency Texas (NSAT) construction project. We issued a report on the NSA Georgia Cryptologic Center military construction (MILCON) project on August 6, 2010. We do not intend to review the military construction ofthe NSA Hawaii Cryptologic Center due to competing resource requirements. We found no· significant issues with the NSA Georgia or Texas and the Hawaji MILCON is complete. (U/foFOUO) The existing NSAT building is located at the Medina Training. Annex of Lackland Air Force Base (AFB) in Northwest San Antonio, Texas. NSAT conducts Signals Intelligence and Computer Network Operations worldwide, in support of National and tactical decision-makers and customers/partners. NSAT applies geographic and functional expertise in exploiting targets operating in the Western Hemisphere and those posing a threat to Homeland Security. (UhTOUO' On January 31, 2005, Acting USD (AT&L) -.vrote to the Deputy Secretary of Defense stating that the United States Anny Corps ofEngineers (USACE), on behalfof NSA, proposed relocating from Lackland AFB to a commercial-leased facility in San Antonio, Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • Surveillance and Privacy in the Snowden Era
    MEDIANZ VOL 14 NO 2 • 2014 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11157/medianz-vol14iss2id119 - KEYNOTE - Surveillance and Privacy in the Snowden Era Nicky Hager1 Introduction The purpose of this paper is to give an overview of issues of mass surveillance, the subject that Edward Snowden has so spectacularly brought to world attention. Many readers will have been following the revelations closely, but general public understanding seems fairly confused and imprecise. Indeed, popular understanding of the Snowden revelations amounts to something like: ‘Everyone is being spied on all the time’, while the typical talk back radio host reply is: ‘I don't care if someone spies on me. If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide’. There is also a perception that ‘It's always gone on’ and ‘everyone does it anyway’. All of these positions are wrong. I believe the more accurately we understand the issues of surveillance and privacy, the more clearly we can see where the harm is, what needs to change and how to effect this change. I will be discussing the history of electronic surveillance, the origins and growth of mass surveillance systems, what the Snowden leaks have revealed and their impact on the Internet and privacy. Finally I will discuss what we can do about it. Lessons from the history of electronic surveillance The Anglo-American spying system dates from WWII and was then put on a permanent footing in the late 1940s as part of the Cold War. A system of radio eavesdropping stations was dotted around the world as part of the intelligence war between the superpowers.
    [Show full text]
  • Technology, Policy, Law, and Ethics Regarding U.S. Acquisition and Use of Cyberattack Capabilities
    PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION Technology, Policy, Law, and Ethics Regarding U.S. Acquisition and Use of Cyberattack Capabilities EMBARGOED FROM PUBLIC RELEASE UNTIL 1:00 p.m., April 29, 2009 except with express permission from the National Research Council. William A. Owens, Kenneth W. Dam, and Herbert S. Lin, editors Committee on Offensive Information Warfare Computer Science and Telecommunications Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. Support for this project was provided by the Macarthur Foundation under award number 04- 80965-000-GSS, the Microsoft Corporation under an unnumbered award, and the NRC Presidents’ Committee under an unnumbered award. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-XXXXX-X International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-XXXXX-X Additional copies of this report are available from: The National Academies Press 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285 Washington, DC 20055 (800) 624-6242 (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) Internet: http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2009 by the National Academy of Sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • Documents Reveal Top NSA Hacking Unit -
    Druckversion - Inside TAO: Documents Reveal Top NSA Hacking Unit - ... http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-nsa-uses-powerful-toolbox... 12/29/2013 09:18 AM Inside TAO Documents Reveal Top NSA Hacking Unit By SPIEGEL Staff The NSA's TAO hacking unit is considered to be the intelligence agency's top secret weapon. It maintains its own covert network, infiltrates computers around the world and even intercepts shipping deliveries to plant back doors in electronics ordered by those it is targeting. In January 2010, numerous homeowners in San Antonio, Texas, stood baffled in front of their closed garage doors. They wanted to drive to work or head off to do their grocery shopping, but their garage door openers had gone dead, leaving them stranded. No matter how many times they pressed the buttons, the doors didn't budge. The problem primarily affected residents in the western part of the city, around Military Drive and the interstate highway known as Loop 410. In the United States, a country of cars and commuters, the mysterious garage door problem quickly became an issue for local politicians. Ultimately, the municipal government solved the riddle. Fault for the error lay with the United States' foreign intelligence service, the National Security Agency, which has offices in San Antonio. Officials at the agency were forced to admit that one of the NSA's radio antennas was broadcasting at the same frequency as the garage door openers. Embarrassed officials at the intelligence agency promised to resolve the issue as quickly as possible, and soon the doors began opening again.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Data Center - Wikipedia
    10/1/2020 Utah Data Center - Wikipedia Coordinates: 40.427°N 111.934°W Utah Data Center The Utah Data Center (UDC), also known as the Intelligence Community Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative Data Center,[1] is a data storage facility for the United States Intelligence Community that is designed to store data estimated to be on the order of exabytes or larger.[2] Its purpose is to support the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI), though its precise mission is classified.[3] The National Security Agency (NSA) leads operations at the facility as the executive agent for the Director of National Intelligence.[4] It is located at Camp Williams near Bluffdale, Utah, between Utah Lake and Great Salt Lake and was completed in May 2019 at a cost estimated in 2014 to be $1.5 billion.[5] NSA's Utah Data Center The Utah Data Center, code-named Bumblehive, is the first Intelligence Community Comprehensive National Cyber-security Initiative (IC CNCI) data center designed to support the US intelligence community. The "massive data repository" is designed to cope with the large increase in digital data that has accompanied the rise of the global internet.[6] Contents Purpose Structure See also References External links Purpose The data center is able to process "all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Internet searches, as well as all types of personal data trails—parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital 'pocket litter'."[7] In response to claims that the data center would be used to illegally monitor email of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • NSA Methoden 30.12.2013
    Die NSA hat eine geheime Abteilung, die Spezialausrüstung herstellt: Spähsoftware für Rechner und Handys, Mobilfunk-Horchposten, manipulierte USB-Stecker und unsichtbare Wanzen. Hier sehen Sie Auszüge aus dem hausinternen Bestellkatalog der Abteilung ANT - Preise inklusive. Wenn die NSA-Abteilung Tailored Access Operations (maßgeschneiderte Operationen, kurz TAO) ein Netzwerk oder einen Rechner infiltrieren möchte, wendet sie sich an ihre Technikspezialisten. Die entsprechende Einheit des US-Geheimdienstes wird hausintern ANT genannt. Vermutlich stehen die Buchstaben für Advanced Network Technology, denn was ANT herstellt, sind Angriffswaffen zur Penetration von Netzwerkausrüstung, zur Überwachung von Handys und Computern. ANT-Produkte helfen den NSA-Mitarbeitern dabei, überall dort einzudringen, Daten auszuleiten oder sie gar zu verändern, wo die herkömmlichen Methoden der NSA nicht ausreichen. Mehr über die Abteilung TAO, ihre Stärken und ihre Tricks lesen Sie in der aktuellen Ausgabe des SPIEGEL . Dem SPIEGEL liegt auch ein NSA-interner Katalog vor, in dem Ausrüstung der TAO-Abteilung ANT feilgeboten wird, Preise inklusive. Ein manipuliertes Monitorkabel etwa, dass es "TAO-Personal erlaubt zu sehen, was auf dem anvisierten Monitor angezeigt wird", gibt es demnach für 30 Dollar, eine "aktive GSM Basisstation", die es erlaubt, sich als Handy-Funkmast auszugeben, um so Mobiltelefone zu überwachen, für 40.000 Dollar. Eine als normaler USB-Stecker getarnte Computerwanze, die unbemerkt über eine Funkverbindung Daten senden und empfangen kann, kostet im Fünfzigerpack über eine Million Dollar. Solche Geräte benutzen übrigens nicht nur Geheimdienste - kürzlich etwa wurde ein Fall von Hightech- Drogenschmuggel im Hafen von Antwerpen bekannt, bei dem ebenfalls derart modifizierte USB-Stecker eine Rolle spielten . EU-Niederlassungen, Staatschefs, Telekommunikationskonzerne Das ANT-Arsenal wird keineswegs nur zur Verfolgung von Terrorverdächtigen eingesetzt, wie mittlerweile bekannt ist.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 4Th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (Cycon 2012)
    2012 4th International Conference on Cyber Confl ict PROCEEDINGS C. Czosseck, R. Ottis, K. Ziolkowski (Eds.) 5-8 JUNE, 2012 TALLINN, ESTONIA 2012 4TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CYBER CONFLICT (CYCON 2012) Copyright © 2012 by NATO CCD COE Publications. All rights reserved. IEEE Catalog Number: CFP1226N-PRT ISBN 13 (print): 978-9949-9040-8-2 ISBN 13 (pdf): 978-9949-9040-9-9 ISBN 13 (epub): 978-9949-9211-0-2 COPYRIGHT AND REPRINT PERMISSIONS No part of this publication may be reprinted, reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence ([email protected]). This restriction does not apply to making digital or hard copies of this publication for internal use within NATO, and for personal or educational use when for non-profi t or non-commercial purposes, providing that copies bear this notice and a full citation on the first page as follows: [Article author(s)], [full article title] 2012 4th International Conference on Cyber Confl ict C. Czosseck, R. Ottis, K. Ziolkowski (Eds.) 2012 © NATO CCD COE Publications PRINTED COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION ARE AVAILABLE FROM: NATO CCD COE Publications Filtri tee 12, 10132 Tallinn, Estonia Phone: +372 717 6800 Fax: +372 717 6308 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.ccdcoe.org LEGAL NOTICE: This publication contains opinions of the respective authors only. They do not necessarily refl ect the policy or the opinion of NATO CCD COE, NATO, or any agency or any government.
    [Show full text]
  • INTERNATIONAL the NSA Uses Powerful Toolbox in Effort to Spy On
    The NSA Uses Powerful Toolbox in Effort to Spy on G... http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-nsa-us... Home Video Themen Forum English DER SPIEGEL SPIEGEL TV Abo Shop RSS Mobile Newsletter Sign in | Register INTERNATIONAL Front Page World Europe Germany Business Zeitgeist Newsletter English Site > World > NSA Spying Scandal > The NSA Uses Powerful Toolbox in Effort to Spy on Global Networks Inside TAO: Documents Reveal Top NSA Hacking Unit By SPIEGEL Staff Google Earth The NSA's TAO hacking unit is considered to be the intelligence agency's top secret weapon. It maintains its own covert network, infiltrates computers around the world and even intercepts shipping deliveries to plant back doors in electronics ordered by those it is targeting. In January 2010, numerous homeowners in San Antonio, Texas, stood December 29, 2013 – 09:18 AM baffled in front of their closed garage doors. They wanted to drive to work or head off to do their grocery shopping, but their garage door Print Send openers had gone dead, leaving them stranded. No matter how many Feedback times they pressed the buttons, the doors didn't budge. The problem primarily affected residents in the western part of the city, around Comment | 35 Comments Military Drive and the interstate highway known as Loop 410. Tweet 4,383 Recommend 16k In the United States, a ANZEIGE country of cars and commuters, the mysterious From DER SPIEGEL garage door problem quickly became an issue for local politicians. Ultimately, the municipal government solved the riddle. Fault for the error lay with the United States' foreign intelligence service, the National Security Agency, which has offices in San Antonio.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyberattack Capabilities
    Technology, Policy, Law, and Ethics Regarding U.S. Acquisition and Use of CYBerattacK CapaBILITIes William A. Owens, Kenneth W. Dam, and Herbert S. Lin, Editors Committee on Offensive Information Warfare Computer Science and Telecommunications Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Gov- erning Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engi- neering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. Support for this project was provided by the MacArthur Foundation under award number 04-80965-000-GSS, the Microsoft Corporation under an unnumbered award, and the NRC Presidents’ Committee under an unnumbered award. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this pub- lication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-13850-5 International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-13850-7 Library of Congress Control Number: 2009930416 Additional copies of this report are available from: The National Academies Press 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285 Washington, DC 20055 (800) 624-6242 (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) Internet: http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2009 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures Margaret Hu Washington and Lee University School of Law, [email protected]
    Washington and Lee Law Review Volume 72 | Issue 4 Article 4 Fall 9-1-2015 Taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures Margaret Hu Washington and Lee University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr Part of the Fourth Amendment Commons, and the Privacy Law Commons Recommended Citation Margaret Hu, Taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures, 72 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 1679 (2015), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol72/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington and Lee Law Review at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures Margaret Hu∗ Abstract This brief Essay offers a proposed taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures. An informed discussion on the legality and constitutionality of the emerging cybersurveillance and mass dataveillance programs revealed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden necessitates the furtherance of cybersurveillance aptitude. This Essay contends, therefore, that a detailed examination of the Snowden disclosures requires not just a careful inquiry into the legal and constitutional framework that guides the oversight of these programs. A close interrogation also requires a careful inquiry into ∗ Assistant Professor of Law, Washington and Lee School of Law. I would like to extend my deep gratitude to those who graciously offered comments on this draft, or who offered perspectives and expertise on this research on big data cybersurveillance through our thoughtful discussions: Jack Balkin, Kate Bartlett, danah boyd, Guy Charles, Bobby Chesney, Andrew Christensen, Danielle Citron, Geoff Corn, Jennifer Daskal, Nora Demleitner, Charlie Dunlap, Josh Fairfield, Mark Graber, David Gray, Woody Hartzog, Trina Jones, Brett Max Kaufman, Orin Kerr, J.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Colloquium for Information System Security Education (CISSE) A Study of State Cybersecurity Capabilities for Local and Regional Collaboration, February 2016 Table of Contents Appendix: State by State Detailed Reports .......................................................... 4 Alabama ..................................................................................................... 4 Alaska ........................................................................................................ 9 Arizona .................................................................................................... 11 Arkansas .................................................................................................. 16 California ................................................................................................. 19 Colorado ................................................................................................. 27 Connecticut ............................................................................................. 33 District of Columbia ................................................................................ 36 Delaware ................................................................................................. 41 Florida ..................................................................................................... 46 Georgia ................................................................................................... 53 Hawaii ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]