As the Government battles an ever-increasing number of complex security risks, it must continuously find new ways to sift through data to adequately handle threats. Homeland security leaders can apply a multi-layered approach to enhance its data analytics process through the studies of anthropology and philosophy.
Biometrics are a key tool to help law enforcement and counterterrorism agencies identify threats in many mission areas – crossing borders, at airports, at ports of entry – related to critical infrastructure protection. Knowing someone reduces threat for many homeland security agencies.
Mission priorities such as law enforcement information sharing, immigration modernization, cybersecurity and the insider threat, survivor-centric emergency management, and combatting human trafficking require a more strategic approach to find scarce resources to address growing threats.
During administration changes, agencies face the challenge of onboarding new personnel while maintaining core functions to serve the mission. Fortunately, transition cycles are usually predictable, and preparation can begin well in advance. By adopting past best practices and the latest innovative thinking, Government agencies can become more operationally resilient in the face of both scheduled transitions and unexpected leadership changes.
Today's global threat environment is increasingly complex, especially monitoring individuals leaving and entering countries. Events like the terrorist attacks in Paris put increasing mission pressure on the U.S. to properly vet and identify individuals entering and exiting the country. Refugees from countries of unrest, such as Syria, further complicate this mission challenge.
In the virtual public square, the most valuable intelligence might not be so secret. In fact, the intelligence might be in plain view. During the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the public discovered that the Boston Marathon bombers learned how to build their weapons not in a clandestine operation, but from Al-Qaeda’s public and free online magazine, Inspire. Everything the Tsarnaevs knew about terrorism came from open source information.
The United States confronts a wide array of threats. Terrorism. Transnational criminal organizations. Drug and weapons smuggling. Human trafficking. Cybercrime. And the ongoing challenge of illegal migration across U.S. borders.
Widely regarded as modern slavery, human trafficking refers to the act of profiting from the control and exploitation of others, most commonly in the context of forced labor, sexual slavery, forced marriage, and organ harvesting. Victims often lose their identity, dignity, and self-worth.
After the tragic events of 9/11, there was overwhelming consensus that a coordinated effort against terrorism and other public safety threats was required between the nation’s entire law enforcement, emergency management, and intelligence apparatus. This includes the identified requirement to secure large-scale public events. These events present a potential target for terrorism and other crimes based on size, scope, and especially notoriety.
National-level mission programs require strategic deployment of flexible, agile, and mobile support teams for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to support its employees and stakeholders. Major public events such as the Super Bowl and the Boston Marathon are complex events that need an intense focus on security and information sharing early in their planning phase.
Advances in tooling, education, and job training provide organizations with the opportunity to advance their own cybersecurity programs. If not impenetrable, they are at least harder to breach and therefore a less attractive target than the next organization. It may be tempting to assume new tools solve problems and erase or lessen the need to understand management fundamentals as they apply to cybersecurity. Instead, it is vital to consider how effective cybersecurity depends on management fundamentals, especially on sound resource allocation.
In the years since the attacks of September 11, 2001, government information sharing has received significant public attention. Much lamented failures to ‘connect the dots’ among scattered pieces of data held by different government entities became a rallying point for government reform. The doctrine of “need to know” gave way to the mantra of “responsibility to share.”