CMMC Focus: Protecting Engineering Data and Technical Drawings

Many companies that work with the Department of Defense are now required to meet CMMC cybersecurity requirements to qualify for contracts.   If your business handles Federal Contract Information (FCI) or Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), you may need to complete a CMMC Level 1 or Level 2 self-assessment, and have the policies, documentation, and security controls to support it.   For many organizations, the challenge isn’t just the technology. It’s the policies, documentation, and preparation required to prove compliance.   IntelliSystems helps DoD contractors and subcontractors prepare for CMMC with: • Readiness assessments • Policy development • Security control implementation • Guidance through the compliance process If a future contract depends on CMMC readiness, it’s best to start preparing now.   Schedule a discovery call to discuss where your organization stands. #GovCon #CMMCCompliance #CMMCReadiness #GovernmentContracting #DODContractors #DODSubcontractors #CybersecurityCompliance #CMMC

CMMC compliance doesn't have to feel overwhelming. If you're a defense contractor or subcontractor working with the DoD, you already know: CMMC certification isn't optional—it's coming, and the requirements can feel complex. Here's the good news: you don't have to navigate it alone. We help businesses across Virginia and the Carolinas understand CMMC requirements, close security gaps, and build a clear roadmap to certification readiness. We're not a C3PAO—but we are the partner who helps you get prepared, stay organized, and walk into your assessment with confidence. Our approach: ✅ Understand the requirements and where you stand today ✅ Track your progress and document what auditors need to see ✅ Prepare your team, systems, and policies for certification CMMC compliance is about protecting your contracts, your data, and your reputation. We make it manageable. Working with the DoD supply chain? Let's talk about how we can help you get ready. 📍 Richmond, VA | Charlotte, NC 🔒 Managed IT & Cybersecurity for Defense Contractors

What Phase 1 Means for Weapons Manufacturers Phase 1 of CMMC Is Underway — Here’s What That Means for You For weapons manufacturers, Phase 1 (Nov 2025 – Nov 2026) means: • Level 1 & Level 2 self-assessments appearing in contracts • SPRS submissions required • Executive-level affirmation of compliance If your organization stores or processes Controlled Unclassified Information related to: 1. Technical drawings 2. Manufacturing specifications 3. Ballistics testing documentation 4. Program data You need defensible implementation of NIST SP 800-171 controls. This is about protecting national security data — not just passing an audit. If you haven’t reviewed your SPRS standing or validated your current implementation posture, it’s worth doing so before the next solicitation cycle. #CMMC #DefenseIndustrialBase #NIST800171 #GovCon https://lnkd.in/e4pKkJEN

What Phase 1 Means for Weapons Manufacturers Phase 1 of CMMC Is Underway — Here’s What That Means for You For weapons manufacturers, Phase 1 (Nov 2025 – Nov 2026) means: • Level 1 & Level 2 self-assessments appearing in contracts • SPRS submissions required • Executive-level affirmation of compliance If your organization stores or processes Controlled Unclassified Information related to: 1. Technical drawings 2. Manufacturing specifications 3. Ballistics testing documentation 4. Program data You need defensible implementation of NIST SP 800-171 controls. This is about protecting national security data — not just passing an audit. If you haven’t reviewed your SPRS standing or validated your current implementation posture, it’s worth doing so before the next solicitation cycle. #CMMC #DefenseIndustrialBase #NIST800171 #GovCon https://lnkd.in/efKgKuTG

Still think CMMC is “a prime contractor problem”? It’s not—and that misconception is putting a lot of subcontractors at risk. DFARS 252.204-7021 and 32 CFR 170.23 are clear: if you process, store, or transmit Federal Contract Information (FCI) or Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) for a DoD contract, CMMC applies to you—prime or sub, any tier in the supply chain. Even if you “only touch FCI,” you’re still in scope. It also means primes can’t waive CMMC requirements for their subs. The regulations don’t care what industry you think you’re in; they care what data you handle. If you’re a subcontractor handling FCI or CUI, now is the time to validate your scope and readiness. Not sure where to start? Let’s talk about a practical path to CMMC compliance for your organization. #CMMC #GovernmentContractors #Compliance #cybersecurity https://hubs.ly/Q046z1mD0

One of the first challenges many defense contractors face when preparing for CMMC Level 2 is scope. Before policies, tools, or documentation, we must ask: Where does Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) actually live in your environment? Getting the scope right early on dramatically reduces compliance complexity, cost, and timeline. The OMSecureWorks program team can help you by bringing it back to the fundamentals: ✔ Identify and define CUI boundaries ✔ Map systems, users, and data flows ✔ Align environments with NIST SP 800-171 practices ✔ Build a practical path to CMMC Level 2 readiness CMMC preparation doesn’t have to be overwhelming; find clarity in the chaos. If CMMC Level 2 is on your roadmap, we’re here to help you get started. DM "ready" for a no cost introductory consult. #CMMC #Cybersecurity #GovCon #DefenseIndustrialBase #Compliance #CUI

Most defense contractors don’t fail CMMC because they “didn’t try hard enough.” They fail because they start in the wrong place. A NIST SP 800-171 self-assessment can feel like progress—until a C3PAO asks for objective evidence: configs, logs, access records, and documented procedures. That’s when teams realize CMMC Level 2 isn’t a security project…it’s a business condition tied directly to contract eligibility. In our latest blog, we break down: - The #1 mistake we see contractors make before they engage help - What a CMMC consulting firm delivers (and what still lands on your team) - Why “implementing controls” isn’t enough if you can’t defend them live in an assessment - The two questions to answer before you spend money on a roadmap Read it here: https://lnkd.in/e559_PnM #CMMC #CMMCCompliance #CMMCLevel2 #DFARS #NIST800171 #DIB #DefenseIndustrialBase #GovernmentContracting #Cybersecurity #Compliance #ManagedServices #RegulatedIndustries

CMMC is raising the bar for cybersecurity across the Defense Industrial Base — and the DoD isn’t slowing down. For contractors, this isn’t just another compliance checkbox. It’s a contract eligibility requirement with real revenue implications. The companies that prepare early aren’t just avoiding risk — they’re building stronger systems, cleaner documentation, and a clear advantage when it’s time for assessment. Our white paper breaks down what’s changing, what assessors are looking for, and how to build a sustainable path to compliance. 👉 Download the guide: https://hubs.ly/Q0463PFT0 ➡️ Join the wait list for our virtual CMMC panel to learn more: https://lnkd.in/gGB8KpTG #CMMC #CybersecurityCompliance #DefenseContractors #DoD

ENISA just made it clear: Being IEC 62443 compliant does not guarantee you meet CRA or NIS2 requirements. The takeaway? No shortcuts: Standard certifications are just the baseline No generic solutions: One size does not fit all It's on you: regulators expect individual risk assessment to close the gap Thanks Piet De Vaere and José Antonio Gutiérrez Díaz for the catch

Last week the EU Commission made it very clear: they have 𝗻𝗼 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 "𝗯𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗱 𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹" 𝗖𝗥𝗔 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻 𝗜𝗘𝗖 𝟲𝟮𝟰𝟰𝟯-𝟰-𝟭 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗜𝗘𝗖 𝟲𝟮𝟰𝟰𝟯-𝟰-𝟮 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘆. They said so very explictly on stage at the ENISA Cybersecurity Conference in Brussels. While this statement is fully consistent with the Commission's previous messaging, I expect many industry stakeholders will still find it surprising; there has been a lot of noise around this topic over the last two years. The Commission's reasoning is straightforward. 𝗙𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘆, 𝗶𝘁 𝗺𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗯𝗲 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰 𝗲𝗻𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗿'𝘀 𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁. That requires a sufficiently narrow scope. Since the CRA adaptations of IEC 62443-4-1 and IEC 62443-4-2 function much more like horizontal standards than true verticals, presumption of conformity is simply not achievable for them. And frankly, we have already seen what happens when you try to grant presumption of conformity to a broad cybersecurity standard. The EN 18031 series (RED DA) was exactly that attempt, and those standards turned out to be extremely hard to work with and riddled with loopholes. That experience likely only reinforces the Commission's position: broad standards and presumption of conformity do not mix well. What does this mean in practice? Well 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀: ➡ The product category-specific 𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹𝘀 based on IEC 62443 (EN 50XXX-X) 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗶𝗻 𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗽𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘆. ➡ 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗘𝗡 𝟲𝟮𝟰𝟰𝟯-𝟰-𝟭 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗘𝗡 𝟲𝟮𝟰𝟰𝟯-𝟰-𝟮 for default products, even without the presumption of conformity. So if you're working with IEC 62443 in the context of the CRA, don't panic. But do make sure you understand which standards will carry presumption of conformity and which won't. Particularly if you're working on an Important Class I product. #CRA #Cybersecurity #ENISA #IEC62443 #EURegulation #ProductSecurity #EN18031 (Image is AI generated)