Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
17D_guy

That Cyber Thread

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, panchbarnes said:

No strat for you LT... :bash:


Gigabytes of sensitive Air Force documents reportedly discovered by security firm

"The security firm MacKeeper came across an Air Force lieutenant’s misconfigured backup hard drive."

 

As usual the AFTimes has terrible journalism.

 

It was a Lt Col's drive. Probably will pick up O-6, get SDE, and pin it all on a lieutenant though.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/leaked-us-military-files-exposed/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, zach braff said:

 

Maybe not the best way to do so, but I think I see where the kid was going here.  With the new C2 construct we have to fight for what limited resources we can get to fix issues, and it appears this squadron might be trying to prioritize based on mission.  If he uses this data to gain a higher priority for your ticket (vs. the personnelist who has a ticket because facebook is slow), you may get your sh-t fixed faster.  Probably could have been better staffed/advertised in your wing though.

Of course they should probably know most of this stuff already... In our sq we have a standing rule that units directly involved in our wing's core missions get priority, however, at this point very few of our major issues/tickets can be handled in house.  We have a good pic internally of what missions are out there and impact of these tickets to provide when we have push them up, but sometimes we try to get a better picture so we can fight to have 24 AF actually fix our sh-t instead of letting it sit in a black hole.

Again - just trying to give the kid the benefit of the doubt...looks like they may have the right idea, but an approach that needs work.  Or he could be an idiot (or worse have idiot leadership), but there may be another side to the story.  A call to the Sq/CC or DO should fix easily.

ZB

What about asking for priority/need date when the ticket is filed (if the system supports this)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, zach braff said:

 

Many good words...

ZB

ZB's right all around.  Again, the communication from the "former" communication guys just sucked.  Shockingly the decision was made by a bunch of Cols that this was our way ahead, you deal with it.  Our 1-star and 2-star are working hard to address that issue and have pushed out a ton more info at the MAJCOM A6 level and up.  

Guess what rank most A6's are... yep.  Seems like there's this magic rank where shit just goes sideways.  I don't know why that is.  Ideally they'd be sharing that information down.  Do other AFSC's have info hoarders the way we do?

The new C2 construct is tough, but it's literally the only way we can do business moving forward.  The manning issues have hit everyone, including our cyber operators/maintainers.  So, we need MAJCOMs to tell us what no-kidding they need fixed so we can decide if we're going to fix email/internet or some mission system.  It's not different than when I was at a base and got a call that some Maj couldn't get on the ShareDrive from some naming party slides or fixing the scheduling office's Capt's workstations with a blizzard rolling in.  Of course a exec's inability to get his GO's alt-token working still seems to float to the top....

On top of this we're trying to develop processes for everything you real domain operators have that works in cyber.  Except we have the fight of needing to help out customers in addition to needing to do operations...for now.

Anyone on the new Microsoft office email?  How's that working out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, magnetfreezer said:

What about asking for priority/need date when the ticket is filed (if the system supports this)?

It does, but only to a certain level then you gotta start rolling in rank to get it higher and higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...this happened - 

 

My Fellow Warrior-Airmen;

At the past CORONA gathering the CSAF directed the merger of 24th and 25th Air Force into a single NAF under Air Combat Command (ACC). ACC is the OPR for integration planning with AFSPC, 24AF and 25AF as OCRs. We are tasked to deliver a decision brief for implementation to the SECAF at CORONA TOP at the end of June. This is the extent of the formal and official guidance I've received to date.

Way Ahead: GEN's Raymond and Holmes are meeting next week at the Space Symposium in Colorado Springs to discuss our way-ahead and provide both staffs with planning guidance. We (24 AF) will be intimately involved and I will be personally involved in this strategic endeavor for our Air Force. I fully expect the two NAF staffs to have leading roles on the planning given our deep operational expertise. We do not know any more specifics at this time.

 I developed a detailed enterprise-level perspective on optimizing Air Force Cyber Domain Operations over the past 6+ months which has been briefed to Gen Raymond, Gen Holmes, ADM Rogers and the VCSAF. It outlines the core strategic challenges of our AF cyber domain which we must resolve moving forward. As many of you know, I was vocal that an ill-conceived and hasty thrust to simply mash our two NAF's together is not an acceptable course of action. I briefed options similar to the Navy Task Force and Army OPCON models for their consideration also. BTW, my first pitch was for a Cyber Ops MAJCOM...go big or go home I suppose.

 I campaigned to ensure whatever decision was made that it must:

1. Generate Unity of Command and Unity of Effort for Cyberspace Operations

2. Increase support to our Air Component Commanders

3. Elevate Air Force Cyberspace Domain Operations from a 3rd echelon Command/2-star posture, to a Component Command on-par with USN/USARMY.

4. Normalize our force O/T/E functions and Joint Force Presentation to USCYBERCOM

5. Improve Intelligence Support to Cyberspace Operations

6. Not break the G-ISR enterprise or impede CMF build/Operations

 

 We will look at the merger holistically based upon these and other desired end-states, then integrate and aggregate the necessary capabilities and authorities across our two NAFs to generate the most effective organization possible...an "Information Dominance NAF" for our Air Force....it's something bigger than 24th and 25th combined in my opinion. Don't get fixated on structure, design, etc....form will follow function once designed and approved.

 I believe we have have lost a battle, but ultimately won the War for Air Force Cyber Ops. The opportunities presented are significant and powerful. Now is the time to focus on multi-domain, multi-functional integration (Cyber Ops, All-source Intel, EW, IO) to deliver decisive full-spectrum global information dominance capabilities and effects for our Service, the Joint Force and our great Nation.

 The decision to move the new NAF into ACC was based primarily on the Air Force's desire to grow our Service's role and posture for Space Operations within DoD, adding further strain on AFSPC's already insufficient Cyber Ops staff capacity.

 I intend to host as series of Town Hall events once we have formal guidance and the planning teams have commenced their efforts.

 So, that's all we know right now. I am certain the RUMOR MILL is off the charts and generating a lot of unnecessary anxiety and uncertainty already. I need all our leaders at every echelon to help belay concerns, squash speculation and help us maintain focus on our demanding "BOSDEE" lines of effort. We must do this in-stride and ensure our missions go on without fail, the CMF is built and trained as planned, and that we take care of the personal and professional needs of our Airmen and Civilians 24/7...you forever remain our most precious resource and I know this will only add to whatever anxiety you have. As soon as I know more, and have decisive information I will let you know.

 These are exciting times and I am honored to share them with such audacious and innovative leaders...I am absolutely certain you will make our Air Force proud in this new enterprise endeavor.

Lead on!

V/R

Wedge

CHRIS P. WEGGEMAN

Major General, USAF

Commander, 24 AF (AFCYBER)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 17D_guy said:

Dope news.

V/R

Wedge

CHRIS P. WEGGEMAN

Major General, USAF

Commander, 24 AF (AFCYBER)

Made my day when I saw the news this week.  It will be a good thing to have the network run by a community that understands there is more of a mission than just the network.  Perhaps my cries of "your nonsensical fvcking rules are hurting my wing's ability to launch jets" might fall on an ear that gives a sh-t.

zb

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, 

  Lots going on this week in Cyber.  The whole WannaCry issue has again highlighted how awful everyone is at security/patching.  Can't get into specifics, but the USAF is no better with getting patches loaded on time.  But our boundaries are amazing and the operators there are legit.  If you'd like some more info on WannaCry, just google it.

  Also had a ISAG group come by our spaces this week to discuss cyber things with every rank group.  It was interesting to talk with the different rank groups what was covered in their areas and how people felt about the event overall.  Some felt they were talked down to, my group felt listened to though we were bewildered by the confusion Gen Welch had when discussing how cyber does assignments.

  He stated repeatedly that A1 likes us all as 17D's, because they can just throw us around so much easier into assignments.  Someone actually said "A1 got us into this fiasco."  There's little/no concern for past experience or training once you're a Capt.  He said that as a 11F he was always an 11F, and up through Col could count on staying near, if not in, a flying position.  It's just not the same for us "cyber opertors."  We can do 2 17S ops tours (DCO/OCO) and then go to 17D staff, then go be a 17D DO at a traditional Comm Sq, and then go back to staff in a 17D slot, then go back to 17S Ops as a Sq CC...on a completely different weapon system on which initially qualified.  There is no staying qualified on the weapon system you were previously on.  There's kinda discussion for that with the Comm Sq of the Future, but that's for DCO.  OCO... there's nothing.  Where do you think a large portion of our true operators (in the legit sense) are?

  Then come to find out, while our manning is absolute garbage (remember Grosso's "90% retention necessary") we're getting promoted at a significantly lower rate.  Gen Welch couldn't understand how the Comm/Cyber AFSC, which through his whole career had dedicated, hard working and recognized O's/E's, was now getting promoted at a significantly lower rate than previously selected.  Apparently this has caught the eye of some leadership.  

  Meanwhile we just had one of our best Col's retire 29 days short of 3 years with O6 pinned on and AFSPC didn't waive it so he could retire in rank.  Retirement orders stated Lt Col.  Wonder why so few of the non-prior E's who're legit, aren't taking that bonus.  The now-retired Lt Col is doing fine w/ his VP position at a Defense Contractor, but that's just shitty.

  Gen Welch also didn't like that people coming out of IQT/MQT were not comfortable on operating their weapon system.  We had one of our WIC's stay he never felt comfortable and the single month of training on the equipment didn't really prepare him for anything.  He had to do almost everything OJT, and before missions he'd deep dive into what they were going to do so that he could actually use the equipment.

  Finally, there are Cyber guys who just want to do the support mission.  They don't want to be hackers or highly technical.  They want to keep the flying mission running.  However, there's no place for them right now with this deep focus on cyber.  One of the panel members brought up "maintenance" which we cautioned against, because everything's an operation in cyber.

  Overall, good discussion, but reaffirmed my decision to not take the bonus and keep the cards close on future plans.  I've got only a little while left until check-of-the-month club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2017 at 11:12 AM, 17D_guy said:

Then come to find out, while our manning is absolute garbage (remember Grosso's "90% retention necessary") we're getting promoted at a significantly lower rate.  Gen Welch couldn't understand how the Comm/Cyber AFSC, which through his whole career had dedicated, hard working and recognized O's/E's, was now getting promoted at a significantly lower rate than previously selected.  Apparently this has caught the eye of some leadership.

Did you see any of the promotion data used to support this assertion?   I spend some time as a FAM and the assignment team seemed to indicate that I was asking for rather sensitive data.   I did not have access to enough information to try and calculate it myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Bozo said:

Did you see any of the promotion data used to support this assertion?   I spend some time as a FAM and the assignment team seemed to indicate that I was asking for rather sensitive data.   I did not have access to enough information to try and calculate it myself.

No, it was the statement of the panel lead to us.  I would like it to verify on my own.  Our manning from the Assignments team brief is rather abysmal and not at all inline with the rest of the Line Officer's of the AF.  I'm sure it's on MyPers somewhere if I wanted to compile it all... I'll ask around as well.  It is a very interesting statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2017 at 9:12 AM, 17D_guy said:

  He stated repeatedly that A1 likes us all as 17D's, because they can just throw us around so much easier into assignments.  Someone actually said "A1 got us into this fiasco."  There's little/no concern for past experience or training once you're a Capt.  He said that as a 11F he was always an 11F, and up through Col could count on staying near, if not in, a flying position.  It's just not the same for us "cyber opertors."  We can do 2 17S ops tours (DCO/OCO) and then go to 17D staff, then go be a 17D DO at a traditional Comm Sq, and then go back to staff in a 17D slot, then go back to 17S Ops as a Sq CC...on a completely different weapon system on which initially qualified.  There is no staying qualified on the weapon system you were previously on.  There's kinda discussion for that with the Comm Sq of the Future, but that's for DCO.  OCO... there's nothing.  Where do you think a large portion of our true operators (in the legit sense) are?

Classic bureaucrat concerned only with solving the bureaucracy's own problems. 

 

square-peg-round-hole1-210x300.jpg

Edited by Seriously

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, 17D_guy said:

Our manning from the Assignments team brief is rather abysmal and not at all inline with the rest of the Line Officer's of the AF.

Yes, having seen/worked the 17D manning from the MAJCOM level it is amazing to behold the devastation.   My favorite line from the Officer Assignments Team (OAT) brief is: "Majors will be doing Lt Col's jobs, Capts will be doing Majors jobs, and LTs will be doing Capts jobs."   So...we won't promote you but we'll give you all the responsibility.

Oh, and is it just me for has the number of General Officer 17D billets been drastically cut?   I've only seen the inside of one MAJCOM HQ reorganization but the A6 one-star billet was cut when they combined the A2/3/6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Seriously said:

Classic bureaucrat concerned only with solving the bureaucracy's own problems. 

Just to be clear, he was quoting A1 and (in my opinion) did not appear to be in agreement with them.  While very professional and somewhat above it all, he appeared very bewildered at how things were being done.

12 hours ago, Bozo said:

Yes, having seen/worked the 17D manning from the MAJCOM level it is amazing to behold the devastation.   My favorite line from the Officer Assignments Team (OAT) brief is: "Majors will be doing Lt Col's jobs, Capts will be doing Majors jobs, and LTs will be doing Capts jobs."   So...we won't promote you but we'll give you all the responsibility.

Oh, and is it just me for has the number of General Officer 17D billets been drastically cut?   I've only seen the inside of one MAJCOM HQ reorganization but the A6 one-star billet was cut when they combined the A2/3/6.

Exactly on the working you in a higher position, for no more pay or additional benefits (ORB is not a "benefit"), or any mentoring.  I don't know the GO billets, but I'm fine with pilots running the show as long as they're like Wedge and actually care about the cyber mission.  I've not been impressed with the career cyber shiny pennies moving along, but I'm just a CGO.

There is a dearth of Career Cyber/Comm GO's that I can point to for examples to the coming Lt's.  I will say on factor is because the AF assesses a ton of prior-E guys, so even on the assignments team slides the yellow box of "retirement eligible" at 10 years is 3 times that of the rest of the AF.  With how the AF decides for future leaders, they're not going to waste their time (usually) on someone like me or any other prior-E who had actual time as a E versus the short stay the "prior-E" GO's had.

Through every merge the cyber guy's spot is always dropped.  Basically we're like RPA's, tons of lip service but come to actual support and leadership, then we become the afterthought.  We don't even get the flight suit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, an interesting thing from the non-bag wearing ops world.  We have a bunch of legit keyboard ninjas that roll around in my area.  Since Skeletor took off all the ABU bling there's been little to distinguish legit cyber-operator from staff douches (me).  

Newish development, there's special tabs that go on individuals badge holders showing what cyber ops team they're from, if they've finished CNODP, or WIC.  Cool colors, with Sq/Unit flash.  All very military heritage like.

I fully support it because we should have separate recognition for the actual mission hackers (pun intended).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 17D_guy said:

So, an interesting thing from the non-bag wearing ops world.  We have a bunch of legit keyboard ninjas that roll around in my area.  Since Skeletor took off all the ABU bling there's been little to distinguish legit cyber-operator from staff douches (me).  

Newish development, there's special tabs that go on individuals badge holders showing what cyber ops team they're from, if they've finished CNODP, or WIC.  Cool colors, with Sq/Unit flash.  All very military heritage like.

I fully support it because we should have separate recognition for the actual mission hackers (pun intended).

Any pics ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 17D_guy said:

So, an interesting thing from the non-bag wearing ops world.  We have a bunch of legit keyboard ninjas that roll around in my area.  Since Skeletor took off all the ABU bling there's been little to distinguish legit cyber-operator from staff douches (me).  

Newish development, there's special tabs that go on individuals badge holders showing what cyber ops team they're from, if they've finished CNODP, or WIC.  Cool colors, with Sq/Unit flash.  All very military heritage like.

I fully support it because we should have separate recognition for the actual mission hackers (pun intended).

Don't the cyber patches wear... patches?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, magnetfreezer said:

Don't the cyber patches wear... patches?

Ah, Indeed.  But there's other quals and teams that get no recognition otherwise.  Mistype there.

 

8 hours ago, LookieRookie said:

Any pics ?

SCIF...and no badges outside.  

Edited by 17D_guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Rocky Mountain AFCEA is in full effect this week.  Basically the place all the GO's go to hobnob with their future employers and actually get work done.

New AFSPC/CV preaching the truth about Cyber Ops Officers though -

"Skinner said his issue isn't with his airmen's ability or drive, but rather with how they are prepared.

He described an "overly homogenized" career field that promotes a "perpetual amateurism."

The Air Force cybersecurity career field has too few specialties, creating a "jack of all trades, master of none" approach to a rapidly evolving cyber battlefield.

"We need to continue growing a deep bench," he said."

We've been offered a retention bonus and people still aren't staying that are worth much.  Because there's the chance you'll get pulled off keyboard after your first/second assignment and go to a job that utilizes NONE of that experience.  Plus we've still got Col's who think that we can't be a AFSC with "Have's and Have Not's."  So from Cyber Ninja to Traditional Comm Sq should be looked at as good career progression, or to MAJCOM staff working the GO's cloud infrastructure project...or Win10 migration.

We're all considered 17D's...which makes it easy for AFPC to move us around...because that's what's important.

Edited by 17D_guy
trying to fix formatting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concur. AFPC works to make sure Cyber operators never build any continuity or experience. The flying community doesn’t send people for a tour in KC-135s followed by a tour in F-22s followed by an ISR platform, but it is fairly standard to flip 17D/S officers from a CPT squadron to a Comm Flight to work as an exec.  57IAS at Nellis gets first tour LTs operating as Aggressors. There should be some career lanes for OCO, DCO, Infrastructure, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



 The flying community doesn’t send people for a tour in KC-135s followed by a tour in F-22s followed by an ISR platform


No, they send guys from C-17 to MC-12 to T-6, or RPA to C-17 to UPT.

But if there's one career field that needs better operator continuity, cyber is probably it.
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know if this goes here, or in the politics thread.  But good read and more info into Russian influence ops -

https://www.thedailybeast.com/exclusive-lone-dnc-hacker-guccifer-20-slipped-up-and-revealed-he-was-a-russian-intelligence-officer?source=twitter&via=desktop

Edited by 17D_guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moved here for more appropriate discussion but the two links 17D posted for accessing the new outlook from your computer are now blocked by IE and Chrome due to invalid certificates. Any have any luck getting them to work?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

Moved here for more appropriate discussion but the two links 17D posted for accessing the new outlook from your computer are now blocked by IE and Chrome due to invalid certificates. Any have any luck getting them to work?

 

Son of a...

DOD certs aren't trusted by the browser vendors natively.  You have to import then on your own.  Does it show which certs are being denied?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news!

Gen Weggeman is getting another star and will be the ACC Vice...Deputy...whatever.  I might just stay in a little bit longer than necessary.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/23/2018 at 7:59 AM, Fuzz said:

Moved here for more appropriate discussion but the two links 17D posted for accessing the new outlook from your computer are now blocked by IE and Chrome due to invalid certificates. Any have any luck getting them to work?

 

I haven't had this yet because Hill hasn't migrated yet to the new cloud thing.  But, when I had this issue last year after getting my new Win 10 machine (invalid certificate, no more choice to continue to the website anyway), Edge worked like a champ.  So, try Edge if you haven't.  Way better than IE for 90% of the things I need a browser for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×