Thoughts on shaping the Information Age military: Hackers cannot be mass produced

[Commentary] The US Army Signal Corps is designed according to a traditional military recruiting, training, and manning structure. A foundational assumption is that most Signal work can be performed by semi-skilled Privates, under the supervision of skilled Sergeants, and that the Senior Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO), Signal Officer, and Warrant Officer plans and supervises operations from the Battalion and Brigade-level. Most Signal tasks are at “Skill Level 1” and can be satisfactorily taught to anyone during Advanced Individual Training (AIT) at Fort Gordon, Georgia. I challenge these assumptions. Preparing, planning, designing, implementing, operating, and optimizing secure systems and networks requires aptitude, training, and experience. Most Signal Corps tasks are not “Skill Level 1,” and doctrine trails far behind an ever-evolving industry. The Army’s personnel development strategy is best suited to stable, long-lived technologies with minor incremental updates, such as an M-16 or UH-60. Nothing lives long in the tech industry, and we don’t do minor incremental updates. Remember Blackberry? That was before your new Platoon Sergeant went to Drill Sergeant School a few years ago. Everyone talks about the dreaded “Cyber Pearl Harbor.” What can be done to prevent it? What will the response be if it happens? If I may borrow two “truths” from the Special Operations community:
-- “hackers cannot be mass-produced”
-- “competent hackers cannot be created after emergencies occur.”
[William John Holden is a US Army Signal Warrant Officer at Fort Bragg (NC)]