Is Energy’s decision not to name a political appointee to oversee cyber a mistake? | Federal News Network

In fairness, working with DOE_CESER has gotten better over the last few months, thanks to some new leadership. The problem I've experienced in the past dealing with DOE_CESER personnel, prior to the recent management change, was a general lack of interest in collaboration. Certain individuals working in Advisory roles seem more interested in "pushing their weight around" by pressuring people to "follow their guidance" as opposed to a more collaborative approach that would seek to find a common path to solving cybersecurity problems. On several occasions I have reached out with offers to collaborate to a DOE_CESER staff member with cybersecurity responsibilities only to be ignored. That's right, no response to my direct offering to collaborate on certain energy industry initiatives to advance SBOM and Vulnerability Disclosure Reports (VDR) adoption, based on the highest quality cybersecurity guidance available, from NIST. IMO, DOE_CESER is in desperate need of a blood transfusion that would replace the anti-collaboration types working in DOE_CESER with more collaborative and collegial personnel with a motivation to work in public-private partnerships to improve cybersecurity across the entire electric grid, not just the Bulk Electric System. We need to protect the entire grid from cyber threats.