833-847-3280
Schedule a Call

DFARS and Cybersecurity: What Defense Contractors Need to Do

DFARS Assessment

If you are a defense contractor, you have probably been deluged with all kinds of emails promising the end of your business and ability to work with the US Government as a Prime Contractor or subcontractor if you don’t conform to the new DFARS clause (DFARS 252.204.7012) Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting. Any company, with little preparation, can be ready to meet these requirements. There is no reason to raise the alarm, and the blood pressure, of defense contracting company owners all over the U.S.

The DFARS Clause

The DFARS clause specifically states that defense contractors will ensure that any Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), is appropriately protected as outlined in the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-171 Revision 1. Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Systems and Organizations. (Note: The Revision is important as we will see later.) According to the clause, all defense contractors need to meet the requirements of NIST SP 800-171 by December 31.

But before defense contractors start drinking whiskey from the bottle and opening their checkbooks to vendors, a little reading demonstrates that these requirements are not as onerous as they seem and companies, with a little investment, can comply with them with minimal cost.

Where to Start

A company should spend some time understanding what CUI they have and where it should reside to be protected. A good starting place is in Chapter 1 of SP 800-171 where it talks about the CUI registry and links the reader to the National Archives and Records Administration, Controlled Unclassified Information Registry.

Of interest to all defense contractors is the Procurement and Acquisition category, which lists basic contract information such as pricing, contract information or indirect and direct labor costs as CUI. Defense contractors should identify ALL CUI that is in their possession.

Second, the DFARS requirements only applies to the systems where such CUI is stored. So, companies should work hard as previously mentioned to place all their CUI in one location or in the smallest possible configuration to minimize the pain of compliance. For example, a defense contractor with multiple locations may decide to move its CUI to one location and only that location would be subject to NIST SP 800-171.

Third, NIST SP 800-171 Revision 1 states that to meet compliance by 31 December 2017, a contractor must “describe in a system security plan, how the specified security requirements are met, or how the organization plans to meet the requirements”. For the defense contractor, this means that while all 110 controls must be addressed, a contractor is still compliant if it identifies how it will eventually meet the requirements that it is not compliant with. This paragraph is critical in determining how much money a company will spend to meet these requirements for. If a company can prove it has addressed the controls and has a plan, or a roadmap, therefore they will be compliant with 800-171.

Fourth, there are at least three new requirements that companies should be aware of that will cause some concern.

Three New Requirements

First, a company must have multifactor authentication for its employees that have access to systems with CUI. This means that tokens, dongles, or biometric forms of identification, as well as a password, will be required. These solutions are prevalent and not too expensive.

Second, a contractors’ systems with CUI will have to be scanned periodically. Contractors will have to apply a vulnerability scan or have one done by an outside vendor. Numerous vendors in the marketplace provide these services. They are not very expensive. We recommend a third-party vendor. Sometimes IT departments are hesitant when disclosing vulnerabilities that have occurred on their watch.

Third, a company must be able to “create, protect and retain system audit records”. Companies should utilize a Security Event Identification and Management or (SEIM) solution. In case of a breach, this will allow you to collect and organize computer logs to be forensically challenged. Again, there are expensive and inexpensive ways to accomplish this. There are also excellent open source SEIMs, such as the Elastasearch, Logstash, and Kibana (ELK) stack which works well.

Finally, an organization must have an incident response plan to adequately meet the challenges of an incident. In the commercial space, we call this a Cyber Playbook. This outlines the anticipated responses to an incident which include reporting, analysis, detection, and response.

Analyze the impact and cost of complying with NIST 800-171. Understand that, while there are some 110 controls, most of the companies will be compliant with at least 50% of them. The path to compliance is not that rigorous. Review the controls, plan to mitigate areas of non-compliance, and strategize to meet some of the new technical requirements.

MainNerve can help you with that review.

Latest Posts

A transparent image used for creating empty spaces in columns
When a major brand like Victoria’s Secret, MGM, or T-Mobile gets hacked, it’s all over the news. These companies are household names, and a breach affecting them often exposes millions of customer records, making it a national, or even global, story. But what about small…
A transparent image used for creating empty spaces in columns
 Choosing a penetration tester isn’t just about credentials or price; it’s about trust, depth, and the results they deliver. In today’s rapidly evolving cybersecurity landscape, selecting the right penetration testing partner is more critical than ever. At MainNerve, we’ve witnessed significant shifts in the…
A transparent image used for creating empty spaces in columns
Cybersecurity threats in 2025 are evolving faster than most organizations can keep pace with. In early 2025, a global financial institution paid out a staggering $75 million following a ransomware attack. The cause? A single, compromised endpoint tied to a legacy application that had gone…
A transparent image used for creating empty spaces in columns
   Targeted retesting focuses only on the vulnerabilities you’ve already remediated. It’s scoped tightly around the affected systems, configurations, or application components that were updated, patched, or re-engineered in response to findings from the original penetration test. This approach offers several key benefits: 1.…
A transparent image used for creating empty spaces in columns
In an era dominated by automation and AI-driven tools, it’s easy to assume that cybersecurity, like many other industries, can be handled entirely by machines. From auto-generated vulnerability scans to AI chatbots that claim to manage risk, automation is everywhere. However, when it comes to…
A transparent image used for creating empty spaces in columns
 The March 31, 2025, deadline for PCI DSS 4.0 compliance has passed, and organizations now face a new security landscape that demands continuous attention, ongoing validation, and stronger risk-based decision-making. If your organization met the deadline, the work isn’t over. And if you didn’t?…
contact

Our Team

Name(Required)
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
On Load
Where? .serviceMM
What? Mega Menu: Services