Talk to an Expert →
Blog · September 27, 2017

DFARS Cyber Compliance Deadline Is Approaching

Many people are unaware that a significant number of U.S. companies are subject to regulations that share some similarities with the European General Data Protection Regulation (which has companies that handle European data scrambling to get into compliance). Specifically, government contractors have obligations pursuant to Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 252.204-7000 et. seq.
The DFARS regulations were adopted in October 2016 when the U.S. Department of Defense issued a final rule. (See 82 Fed. Reg. 72986 Oct. 21, 2016, available here.) Entities subject to the provisions were given until Dec. 31, 2017, to comply with certain aspects as discussed below. If your organization is a contractor or subcontractor that handles “controlled unclassified information” (see here) you need to make sure your house is in order to comply.

Some of the most significant provisions of the DFARS regulations are:

 

 

 

 

 

 

NIST SP 800-171

The above provisions might not appear especially daunting without an understanding of what NIST SP 800-171 “Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Information Systems and Organizations” entails. As noted above, the DFARS regulations state that covered information systems shall be covered by the security requirements in NIST CUI requirements and that contractors have to request any departures. Therefore, the NIST CUI requirements are incorporated wholly by reference within the DFARS cyber regulations.

Chapter 3 of the NIST CUI requirements specifies the security requirements. There are 14 different sections, 3.1 through 3.14 as follows:

3.1 Access Control
3.2 Awareness and Training
3.3 Audit and Accountability
3.4 Configuration Management
3.5 Identification and Authentication
3.6 Incident Response
3.7 Maintenance
3.8 Media Protection
3.9 Personnel Security
3.10 Physical Protection
3.11 Risk Assessment
3.12 Security Assessment
3.13 System and Communications Protection
3.14 System and Information Integrity

Combined there are over 110 separate requirements detailed within these headings. Some are simple, straightforward controls, e.g., 3.1.8, “Limit unsuccessful login attempts.” Others are broader and open to some interpretation for how they must be implemented such as 3.1.4, “Separate the duties of individuals to reduce the risk of malevolent activity without collusion,” and 3.4.6, “Employ the principle of least functionality by configuring the information system to provide only essential capabilities.” Additionally, the NIST CUI requirements specify a number of ongoing obligations such as training (see 3.2), auditing (see 3.3), change management (see 3.4.3), incident response planning and testing (see 3.6), maintenance (see 3.7), risk assessment (3.11), security assessment (3.12), monitoring (see 3.14.3).

What Must Companies Do?

Combining the strict verbiage of the DFARS cyber regulations with the comprehensive nature of the NIST CUI requirements creates a formidable compliance challenge for any contractor and its subcontractors. If your organization has not yet fully implemented the NIST CUI requirements, it cannot wait any longer to address these issues. Below are some immediate actions a company should take if they have not addressed these issues previously. It is strongly suggested to enlist the assistance of a trusted legal adviser to facilitate this process and manage the ongoing interaction with the DOD.

A first step is to evaluate the NIST CUI requirements in the context of any existing security control programs based on other advisory materials such as NIST SP 800-53 or ISO 27001. The NIST CUI requirements provide a set of tables with the relevant mapping. Assuming a company has previously implemented controls consistent with either of those publications, they can focus on identifying any gaps and addressing those.

If a company has not previously implemented such controls, time is of the essence. They should start with the high-level policies and procedures and implement plans for risk assessments, security assessments, incident response, auditing, configuration management, and awareness and training. Given the time constraints the company should also be simultaneously implementing the controls specified in NIST SP 800-171 such as those relating to access control, authentication, media protection, physical protection, monitoring, and malware defense. Companies must also make sure their incident response plan prepares them to comply with the DFARS regulations tight notice period.

Needless to say, it is a lot of work for a company that has not addressed these issues but it is imperative to do so. In many industries implementing these controls is a precautionary measure that does not directly implicate the business operations in the short term. But the self-disclosing feature of the DFARS regulations have made failure to implement the NIST SP 800-71 a potential bar to future government contracts, which is why companies cannot afford to delay in addressing these issues.

 

CREDIT: Steven Snyder, Law360

See the enclave in action.

The Compliant Computing Enclave keeps CUI inside one boundary, with your endpoints out of scope and the evidence trail already built.

Talk to an Expert →
Keep reading

More from the blog

September 29, 2026

Week 9: Cost and Performance Compound the Risk

Why GCC High cost and limitations matter Last week, we examined Microsoft’s broader security record and...

Read it →

September 22, 2026

Week 8: Microsoft’s Broader Security Record

Why Microsoft security culture matters Last week, we examined support boundaries, personnel access, and why secure...

Read it →

September 16, 2026

Week 7: China-Based Support and the Support Boundary

Why the GCC High support boundary matters Last week, we discussed the “too embedded to reject”...

Read it →