Why?  GSA is already specifying SBOMs.  And is the list to encourage congressional lobbying?

On 16.12.22 20:38, Dick Brooks wrote:

FYI:

Please get the word out to restore the SBOM provision in the NDAA.

“I don't see why any member of Congress would want to hamstring their own cybersecurity professionals from monitoring and mitigating software vulnerabilities that are detectable using an SBOM. Members of Congress please help your own cybersecurity professionals that work so hard to keep you and your districts safe from hacker attacks. Restore the SBOM provision in the NDAA.”

https://energycentral.com/c/pip/industry-objections-spur-changes-cybersecurity-provisions-defense-bill%C2%A0%C2%A0

Thanks,

Dick Brooks

/Active Member of the CISA Critical Manufacturing Sector, /

/Sector Coordinating Council – A Public-Private Partnership/

*/Never trust software, always verify and report! <https://reliableenergyanalytics.com/products>/* ™

http://www.reliableenergyanalytics.com <http://www.reliableenergyanalytics.com/>

Email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>

Tel: +1 978-696-1788




-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#1612): https://lists.spdx.org/g/spdx/message/1612
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/95717040/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/spdx/leave/2655439/21656/1698928721/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to