Overview
Title
Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain: Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The government is asking people to share their thoughts on new rules for flying robots (drones) that could be made by countries the U.S. is worried about, like China and Russia, to help keep everyone safe. They want to know how to keep these drones from causing problems or being used in a way that could hurt people.
Summary AI
In an advance notice of proposed rulemaking, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) of the U.S. Department of Commerce is seeking public comments on potential regulations concerning information and communications technology and services (ICTS) used in unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). These technologies, if linked to foreign adversaries like China or Russia, may pose risks to U.S. national security and critical infrastructure. BIS is asking for feedback on possible definitions of UAS, risks involved, and ways to mitigate those risks, with an aim to protect U.S. interests while minimizing economic impact. The public has until March 4, 2025, to submit their comments.
Abstract
In this advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM), the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) seeks public comment on issues related to transactions involving information and communications technology and services (ICTS) that are designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of foreign adversaries, pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13873, "Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain," and that are integral to unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). This ANPRM will assist BIS in determining the technologies and market participants that may be appropriate for regulation in order to address undue or unacceptable risks to U.S. national security, including U.S. ICTS supply chains and critical infrastructure, or/and to the security and safety of U.S. persons.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) has issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking, inviting public comment on potential regulations concerning the use of information and communications technology and services (ICTS) in unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). These comments are being sought with a focus on mitigating risks to national security and critical infrastructure when these technologies are connected to foreign adversaries like China and Russia. The document outlines the complexity and breadth of considerations that BIS seeks to address, highlighting the potential risks associated with foreign control over critical technologies.
General Summary
This announcement by BIS serves as part of a broader initiative to protect the United States from risks associated with ICTS integral to UAS developed or supplied by entities under the influence of foreign adversaries. The U.S. government is particularly concerned about the potential for these technologies to be used in a manner that could compromise national security, disrupt critical infrastructure, or threaten the safety of U.S. citizens. BIS is soliciting input not just on potential rules but also on definitions and the identification of risks related to UAS operations, especially those linked to foreign nations. Public comments are requested by March 4, 2025, in order to inform future rulemaking.
Significant Issues or Concerns
The document is exceptionally comprehensive, detailing a plethora of issues and inviting input from the public on numerous technical and security-related concerns. This complexity might pose challenges for stakeholders who wish to contribute but may find the volume and technical nature of the document daunting. The risks of introducing anti-competitive effects through regulation are mentioned but not explored in depth, leaving stakeholders uncertain about potential market impacts.
Additionally, the document primarily focuses on China and Russia as foreign threats, potentially overlooking similar risks from other countries. Another concern lies in the lack of specific guidelines for how BIS might validate mitigation measures. The document calls for significant input on numerous highly specific components and scenarios, which might limit the scope and quality of feedback received due to the burden on respondents.
Impact on the Public and Specific Stakeholders
For the general public, ensuring that UAS and related ICTS are secure and free from external tampering is inarguably beneficial. However, the document suggests broad market regulations that could influence the availability and cost of these technologies, potentially affecting individuals and industries reliant on drone technology.
Stakeholders within the UAS supply chain, such as manufacturers, developers, and service providers, may find themselves directly impacted by these potential regulations. These entities might experience increased compliance costs or disruptions in their supply chains, particularly if they depend on foreign adversary-linked components or software. However, they might also benefit from a more secure operating environment if the regulations successfully mitigate identified risks.
Positive and Negative Outcomes
On the positive side, if well-implemented, these regulations could safeguard U.S. infrastructure and citizens' privacy, ensuring that technological advancements do not come at the expense of national security. They may also foster innovation within the domestic market as companies strive to develop compliant technologies and fill gaps left by restricted foreign technologies.
Conversely, there is a potential for negative impacts if these regulations are perceived to stifle competition or limit access to emerging technologies. U.S. businesses might face higher costs or barriers to entry in the UAS market, while also grappling with global supply chain complexities. The document's technical jargon and legal references might also alienate smaller companies or innovators who lack the resources to thoroughly engage with the rulemaking process.
Overall, the document represents an important step in addressing technological vulnerabilities but must balance security with the need for innovation and global competitiveness. Public and industry input will be crucial in shaping rules that protect without unnecessarily hindering tech advancement and access.
Issues
• The document is lengthy and complex, making it difficult for the general public to fully comprehend all aspects without a specialized understanding of UAS and ICTS.
• The potential economic impact on U.S. businesses and the public is mentioned but not detailed in terms of estimates or specific outcomes, which could lead to underestimating or misunderstanding consequences.
• There is a risk of introducing anti-competitive effects through regulation, but the document does not provide specific examples or analyses of potential impacts on market competition.
• The document contains technical jargon and complex legal references which might not be accessible to all stakeholders, especially those without a legal or technological background.
• The document outlines numerous requests for comments, which could be overwhelming and might lead to fewer responses from stakeholders due to the sheer volume of topics and detailed questions.
• The discussion on foreign adversary influence might be perceived as biased by focusing primarily on China and Russia, potentially overlooking risks from other regions or countries.
• There is a lack of clarity on how BIS plans to validate mitigation measures and the specific criteria that would be used for granting temporary authorizations for transactions.
• Ambiguity exists regarding the scope and definitions of ICTS components integral to UAS, leading to potential confusion over what is covered under the proposed rule.
• The document discusses potential risks and threats extensively but provides limited details on specific case studies or evidence supporting the assessed levels of risk.
• There is no discussion on potential unintended consequences of the proposed prohibitions, particularly how they might affect innovation or the availability of technology in the U.S. market.