|
|
 BAE technology may have been 'compromised', says Pentagon, The Independent, By Danny Fortson, May 3, 2008. A war of words has broken out between BAE Systems and the US government after a report by the Pentagon inspector general found that sensitive weapons technology linked to a major fighter jet programme may have been "compromised" due to allegedly lax oversight by the UK defence company. The report didn't cite a single instance of leaks from the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme, the largest defence project in the world. It is being led by Lockheed Martin, the US defence giant, along with several foreign groups, including BAE. But the report said: "The advanced aviation and weapons technology for the JSF programme may have been compromised by unauthorised access at facilities and in computers at BAE Systems, and incomplete contractor oversight may have increased the risk of unintended or deliberate release of information to foreign competitors." Access to military technology has been a sticking point throughout the project, especially given that BAE is developing a rival jet, the Eurofighter Typhoon. The report was published after the Project on Government Oversight, a watchdog, got access to it through a Freedom of Information Act request.… Security of F-35 Jet Secrets Questioned, Washington Post, By Dana Hedgpeth, May 2, 2008.The technology going into the U.S. military's newest fighter plane may have been compromised by unauthorized access to facilities and computers that belong to BAE Systems, one the aircraft's builders, according to a report from the Pentagon's inspector general made public yesterday. The report did not identify specific leaks, but it said "incomplete" Pentagon oversight may have increased "the risk of unintended or deliberate release of information to foreign competitors." BAE, based in Farnborough, England, is one of two main subcontractors working on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and is building some of the plane's electronic and weapons systems and parts of its body. Bethesda-based Lockheed Martin is the lead contractor on the roughly $300 billion program, which is being developed by the United States and eight foreign partners, including Britain. Northrop Grumman of Los Angeles is the project's other main subcontractor. In working on major aircraft, contractors have to share sensitive and classified information, and the government has safeguards in place for the use of it. The Project on Government Oversight (POGO), a watchdog group, filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the inspector general's report, which was done to ensure that controls over classified technology and information on the F-35 were adequate and were being followed by the Defense Department. The report, which was completed in March, looked at selected data that related to the F-35 and found that the "government and its contractors appropriately controlled the export of classified [Joint Strike Fighter] technology to foreign companies." But the report criticized the Defense Department, saying it "did not always employ sufficient controls to evaluate potential unauthorized access to classified U.S. technology" on the F-35 program. The department's Defense Security Service, which is supposed to help oversee the program, didn't monitor BAE or evaluate its security systems, according to the report. The DSS also couldn't verify whether BAE had submitted required security audit reports for 2001 to 2003, the report said. As a result, the Defense Department's "advanced aviation and weapons technology in the [Joint Strike Fighter] program may have been compromised by unauthorized access at facilities and in computers at BAE Systems," according to the 55-page report, which had 16 pages blacked out. In addition, the report said, BAE maintained that information in its internal audits was "privileged and not available" to the government, although there was a "special security agreement" that the contractor was to submit such reports to the Defense Department for review. The DSS did not question BAE's assertion that the reports were off-limits to the government. "This is government information, and BAE is stiff-arming the Pentagon," said Nick Schwellenbach, national security investigator for POGO. "DSS failed in its oversight role to ensure that security improved. It is unknown if classified information was compromised, but it may have been, and if it was, weak Pentagon oversight was a contributing factor."… Pentagon Didn't Safeguard Tech At BAE Facilities -Govt Report, Dow Jones International News, May 1, 2008.Government investigators concluded that the Pentagon didn't properly safeguard classified aviation and weapons technology at facilities owned by BAE Systems PLC (BAESY) for at least a two-year period. In a report made public Thursday, the Pentagon's Inspector General found that the Defense Security Service didn't do enough to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive Joint Strike Fighter program technology at BAE facilities and computers. The Defense Security Service is an arm of the Pentagon that works with government contractors to protect classified information. The report didn't cite any actual breaches of information. … The Inspector General report was released in March but made public Thursday in response to requests under the Freedom of Information Act, including one by the Project on Government Oversight…. Nick Schwellenbach, national security investigator for the Project on Government Oversight, said the Inspector General report is significant because the Pentagon is increasingly turning to foreign contractors to work on major weapons and procurement programs. Fighter jet program may have compromised secret technology, AP, By Joelle Tessler, May 1, 2008.Lax Pentagon oversight may have led to the compromise of classified aviation and weapons technology from the Joint Strike Fighter program at facilities owned by British defense contactor BAE Systems, according to Defense Department investigators. In a report made public Thursday, the Pentagon's Inspector General found that the Defense Security Service, an arm of the Pentagon that works with government contractors to safeguard classified information, did not do enough to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive Joint Strike Fighter program technology at BAE facilities and computers. The report did not cite any actual breaches of information. BAE, the largest foreign defense contractor serving the U.S. military, is a major subcontractor on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Lockheed Martin Corp. of Bethesda, Md., is the lead contractor on the program, one of the most expensive in Pentagon history. The Pentagon recently put the cost of the Joint Strike Fighter program at $298.8 billion. The military plans to purchase 2,443 of the fighter jets for the Air Force, Navy and Marines. The Inspector General report was released in March but made public on Thursday in response to requests under the Freedom of Information Act, including one by the Project on Government Oversight. The report found that while Defense Security officials did conduct security reviews at BAE facilities, they did not properly monitor and evaluate BAE audit reports on the company's security controls for 2004 and 2005. The report also found that the Defense Security Service discarded older BAE security reports, making it impossible to determine whether security weaknesses identified in 2001, 2002 and 2003 had been resolved. And it found that Pentagon officials deferred to BAE when the contractor refused to provide access to information from internal security audits. Nick Schwellenbach, national security investigator for the Project on Government Oversight, said the Inspector General report raises concerns about whether the Pentagon is doing enough to ensure that sensitive and classified military technology is safeguarded by foreign defense contractors. The issue is becoming more relevant, he added, since the Pentagon is increasingly turning to foreign contractors to work on major weapons and procurement programs. … Stealth Fighter Security 'May Have Been Compromised' (Updated), Wired News, By Noah Shachtman, May 01, 2008.The Defense Department hasn't kept close enough watch over the contractors working on its most important aircraft program, the Joint Strike Fighter. And as a result, "the advanced aviation and weapons technology for the JSF program may have been compromised," the Department of Defense's Inspector General notes in a report, obtained by the Project on Government Oversight. The Pentagon is working with eight other countries to build a single, stealthy, single-engine fighter that is supposed to be a low-cost replacement for a huge variety of aircraft -- the A-10, F-16, F/A-18, even the British Harrier jump jets. More than 2,400 JSFs are planned over the next several decades, at a cost of $337 billion. But monitoring the 1,200 contractors working on the planes has proved to be a herculean effort for the Pentagon's Defense Security Service, or DSS. The Inspector General's report doesn't list any specific cases of classified information breaches. But it does state, repeatedly, that the DSS cut regulatory corners, meant to protect the stealth jet's secrets. "DoD [Department of Defense] did not always employ sufficient controls to evaluate and correct potential unauthorized access to classified U.S. technology," the report observes. In particular, the audit found problems with how the Defense Department oversaw BAE Systems, the London-based arms-maker. Defense Security Service officials conducted security reviews at BAE Systems facilities. But the didn't bother to check up on the company's internal audits -- reports that would have "help[ed] the Defense Security Service to evaluate and address potential security weaknesses at BAE Systems, the primary foreign-owned contractor supporting the strike fighter program." … In fact, BAE Systems appeared to reject requests for the security reports, saying that "all information contained in the internal audits was privileged and not available to the Government, despite the requirement in the SSA [Special Security Agreement] that the contractor submits those reports to DoD [Department of Defense] for review and appropriate action. DSS did not challenge BAE Systems' claim that the internal audits are privileged and not subject to Government review. Rather than treating contractors' audit reports as useful tools to complement the industrial security assessments, DSS classifies all contractor reports as "routine correspondence" and destroys them after two years. "How can the Pentagon security agency allow BAE, its contractor, to deny access to these security records?" Nick Schwellenbach, a Project on Government Oversight national security investigator, asked in a statement. "This is government information and BAE is stiff-arming the Pentagon." Pentagon inspector faults U.S. oversight of BAE, Reuters, By Jim Wolf, May 1, 2008. U.S. technology going into the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft may have been compromised by unauthorised access at facilities and computers belonging to BAE Systems (BAES.L: Quote, Profile, Research), the Pentagon's inspector general said in a report made public on Thursday. The report did not cite any examples of any feared leaks, but said "incomplete" Pentagon oversight may have boosted the risk of unintended or deliberate release of information to foreign competitors. BAE, headquartered in Farnborough, England, is the biggest overseas contractor working on the Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research)-led F-35, which is being developed by the United States and eight foreign partners, including Britain. BAE also plays a key role in developing the competing Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft, said the report obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the Project on Government Oversight, a private watchdog group. "The advanced aviation and weapons technology for the JSF program may have been compromised by unauthorised access at facilities and in computers at BAE Systems, and incomplete contractor oversight may have increased the risk of unintended or deliberate release of information to foreign competitors," said the Pentagon's Office of Inspector General. … POGO Alert - Pentagon IG: Joint Strike Fighter Classified Information "May Have Been Compromised" Due to Lax Contractor Oversight by Pentagon Agency, May 1, 2008. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter costs could hit home, Orlando Sentinel, by Richard Burnett, April 7, 2008.The nation's capital is rumbling about the rising costs of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, and the sound is reverberating all the way to Central Florida. The Pentagon's top acquisition panel met recently to cast a newly critical eye on Lockheed Martin Corp.'s F-35 contract, which supports hundreds of jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue in Central Florida. Government auditors recently cited the F-35 advanced stealth fighter jet among a group of high-profile defense programs that have run billions of dollars over their originally projected price tags. At its current pace, the F-35 deal could cost nearly 50 percent more than the target of $203 billion set by the military in 2000, the Government Accountability Office said in its annual Pentagon spending review. … "Its costs have now jumped so much, it might not be that much cheaper than the F-22," said Nick Schwellenbach, an investigator for the Project for Government Oversight, a defense-watchdog group in Washington. "But the Joint Strike Fighter does much more. It has a bigger payload and fulfills close air-support missions. It would be hard to imagine the Pentagon cutting the F-35."  POGO letter to Senators Levin and McCain regarding the Pentagon request for multiple fixed wing aircraft as part of the FY 2007 Emergency Supplemental Request for the Global War on Terror, March 22, 2007. Idaho base could host new jet, Associated Press, October 23, 2005.The Pentagon is considering Idaho's Mountain Home Air Force Base as a future home for the military's next-generation tactical fighter jet, according to a new report sent to Congress. read this article » GAO Testimony on Tactical Aircraft - Status of the F/A-22 and JSF Acquisition Programs and Implications for Tactical Aircraft Modernization, March 3, 2005. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) portion of the Pentagon's Department of Operational Test and Evaluation 2003 Annual Report. The Pentagon used to make this report publicly available on the web, but is no longer doing so. POGO has scanned in the reports of eleven of the biggest or most troubled systems. April 16, 2004. "Pentagon: Lockheed's Joint Strike Fighter Costs to Rise $45 Billion," Reuters, April 5, 2004. The total cost of Lockheed Martin Corp.'s Joint Strike Fighter program will surge $45 billion, or 22.6 percent, to $245 billion, the Pentagon said on Monday, citing rising labor costs and program delays. Letter to Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition Pete Aldridge urging caution before plunging into the Joint Strike Fighter contract. October 24, 2001.
|
|||
