Bill Overview
Title: AI for National Security Act
Description: This bill modifies policy related to the Department of Defense enterprise-wide procurement of cyber data products and services, including by providing for the use of artificial intelligence-based endpoint security that prevents cyber-attacks and does not require constant internet connectivity to function.
Sponsors: Rep. Obernolte, Jay [R-CA-8]
Target Audience
Population: People using Department of Defense IT infrastructure
Estimated Size: 2700000
- The bill targets the Department of Defense, which influences all military personnel.
- The enhancement of cybersecurity measures impacts all users of the Department of Defense's digital infrastructure.
- Artificial intelligence-based endpoint security measures may indirectly affect civilian employees, contractors, and possibly relatives of military personnel due to enhanced defense mechanisms safeguarding national security infrastructure.
- Considering the size and scope of the Department of Defense, a significant number of individuals could be indirectly protected via these AI implementations.
Reasoning
- The policy's direct impact is primarily on Department of Defense personnel, including both military and civilian employees. Thus, individuals outside of this group are likely to experience minimal impact if they are not directly linked to the Department's infrastructure.
- AI measures in cybersecurity primarily function to mitigate risks related to cyber-attacks, which has benefits in alleviating anxieties surrounding data breaches and system downtime among DoD personnel.
- Cost allocation must be assessed over a decade, ensuring that initial costs keep the project within budget while allowing scalability through technological advancements.
- Since it involves cybersecurity, the level of impact can vary significantly for different individuals, depending on their role and reliance on IT infrastructure.
- A diverse array of individuals, including those with tangible connections to the DoD such as through familial or professional ties, offer valuable perspectives on whether indirect benefits are perceived or if they feel distanced from the policy’s ripple effects.
Simulated Interviews
Military Officer (Fort Bragg, NC)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy brings much-needed improvements to our digital security.
- Having AI-based endpoint security will lessen the frequency of cyber threats.
- Though it doesn't impact my family directly, it gives comfort knowing our operations have enhanced safeguards.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Civilian IT Specialist (Arlington, VA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial as our existing systems are vulnerable and outdated.
- AI interventions in cybersecurity will mitigate a lot of our current manual workload, leading to fewer overtime hours.
- In the long term, it could mean cost savings for our teams which is positive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 2 |
Cybersecurity Analyst (San Diego, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The implementation seems promising but to what extent it will impact contractors is unclear.
- Our contracts might shift focus, but I expect increased collaboration with the DoD.
- From a personal security perspective, it's reassuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The AI for National Security Act aligns well with current cybersecurity needs across defense sectors.
- A shift toward utilizing AI can revolutionize our cybersecurity landscape.
- The budget allocation is ambitious but necessary for futureproofing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Security Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 37 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This move could significantly increase demand for AI in security applications, widening our scope for future projects.
- From a professional growth view, it is positive news as it could open up new career pathways for AI developers in security domains.
- Continuous advancements in AI security tools are necessary, although not always exciting or visible externally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Air Force Veteran (Colorado Springs, CO)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I'm no longer active, this shift makes me hopeful about the protections my former comrades will have.
- AI might be intimidating in terms of job displacement, but cybersecurity integrity offers peace of mind.
- This policy may not have a direct impact on me but knowing defenses are strengthened is reassuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
DoD Contractor (Rockville, MD)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Every initiative that reinforces cybersecurity is a step in the right direction, though implementation is key.
- Resource allocation could determine the success of this policy.
- AI-based measures bring longer-term scalability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 4 |
Navy Reservist (Pensacola, FL)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm just starting out, but knowing there is a focus on AI in security is motivating for my studies.
- I'm curious about how this will impact future deployments and digital operations.
- There is always a balance between innovation and operational knowledge.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cybersecurity Professor (Orlando, FL)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like these are what prepare the defense sector for a robust future.
- The inclusion of AI methods in defense speaks volumes about where teaching priorities should lie.
- Budget concerns could affect the practicality of executing such policies, though they serve as a guide for institutional learning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Retired military contractor (San Antonio, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though I'm not in service anymore, DoD cybersecurity developments are aligned with my consulting interests.
- Budgeting is key; AI investments in federal projects need informed spending strategies.
- Overall, confidence in defense infrastructure benefits everyone in the long run.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $125000000, High: $175000000)
Year 2: $175000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $200000000)
Year 3: $180000000 (Low: $155000000, High: $210000000)
Year 5: $200000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $230000000)
Year 10: $220000000 (Low: $190000000, High: $250000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Successful implementation requires robust integration with existing cybersecurity measures to maximize effectiveness.
- AI systems could face challenges adapting to diverse and complex military IT environments.
- The rapid development of AI technology may require flexible, adaptive procurement and deployment strategies.