George Washington University (GWU)

Join us as thought leaders from government and industry share their expertise, their experiences, and their suggestions for harnessing the power of AI to provide noticeable improvements to internal operations while improving security and opening up opportunities for new and expanded services to their constituencies. 

Agencies throughout state, local, territorial, and tribal governments are being encouraged to incorporate artificial intelligence (AI) into their everyday operations, to streamline processes, modernize outdated systems, and strengthen cybersecurity defenses. Using AI is viewed as one promising way to deal with shrinking budgets and increased demand for services by citizens. 

This three-day event addresses key issues that agencies must contend with in ensuring that investment in AI generates maximum benefit. 

Learning Objectives:

• Outline the capabilities of AI management and compliance platforms and match them to the needs of your agency
• Delineate the use of the platforms to maintain auditability and traceability
• Understand how these platforms can guard against “shadow AI,” unauthorized use of AI within the agency
• Identify available AI tools to determine which best fit the security needs of your agency
• Review ways to integrate AI cybersecurity into existing defenses
• Understand the nature and magnitude of the threats posed by AI-empowered attacks
• Delineate places in your agency’s IT systems where AI can serve as a bridge between legacy systems and new services for citizens
• Establish priorities for tasks and processes that can be streamlined through the use of AI tools
• Outline metrics that can measure improvements, such as improved accuracy in testing, cost savings through reductions in outside labor costs (such as coding), and faster turnaround time in updating apps

State and local agencies are exploring how to incorporate artificial intelligence (AI) into their operations – as long as they observe their own state-level and any applicable federal-level regulations.

To meet these requirements, AI governance and compliance platforms help organizations manage, monitor, and enforce policies for safe, ethical, and legal use of AI, covering the entire lifecycle from development to deployment, by automating risk assessment, bias detection, and access control. These platforms centralize control, provide transparency, track data lineage, and automate auditing to build trust and prevent issues like unfair outcomes or data breaches.

Learning Objectives:

• Outline the capabilities of AI management and compliance platforms and match them to the needs of your agency
• Delineate the use of the platforms to maintain auditability and traceability
• Understand how these platforms can guard against “shadow AI,” unauthorized use of AI within the agency

It is widely recognized that the introduction of AI tools is a two-edged sword when it comes to cybersecurity. Attackers, whether profit-driven hackers or hostile nation-states, are using AI to launch faster, wider-spread and more sophisticated attacks, including AI-generated phishing and spear phishing emails, malware capable of adapting to changes in defensive responses, and deepfakes that are very hard to detect.

State and local agencies are attractive targets, since there are many more of them and often do not have the financial or IT resources of federal agencies. 

This makes state and local agencies’ use of AI in cyber defense critical – AI tools can operate at machine speed and scale and adapt in response to evolving threats. These tools can significantly improve threat detection and intelligence by identifying anomalies and patterns signaling attacks under way; automating incident responses such as isolating compromised devices and resetting credentials; using Natural Language Processing (NLP) to flag sophisticated phishing and social engineering attacks; and prioritizing vulnerabilities to emphasize the most critical risks. 

Learning Objectives:

• Identify available AI tools to determine which best fit the security needs of your agency
• Review ways to integrate AI cybersecurity into existing defenses
• Understand the nature and magnitude of the threats posed by AI-empowered attacks

At its annual conference in October 2025, the National Association of State CIOs (NASCIO) focused on “measurable modernization” facilitated by artificial intelligence (AI). Intelligent, AI-powered tools can streamline IT, converting slow, manual legacy system upgrades into faster, cheaper, and more secure processes by automating code analysis, testing, data migration, and even generating code, ultimately making systems more efficient, scalable, and future-proof while freeing humans for higher-value tasks. 

There are several ways AI is suited to improve operations. To name just a few:

• By analyzing legacy code, such as COBOL, to understand its structure, find inefficiencies and even rewrite it into modern coding languages, AI reduces legacy debt and eases manpower needs for obsolete coding skills.
• AI tools can automate testing and quality controls, significantly speeding up quality assurance and moving apps to more easily supported operations.
• Using AI can generate predictive maintenance, identifying potential system failures and enabling self-healing capabilities.

Learning Objectives:

• Delineate places in your agency’s IT systems where AI can serve as a bridge between legacy systems and new services for citizens
• Establish priorities for tasks and processes that can be streamlined through the use of AI tools
• Outline metrics that can measure improvements, such as improved accuracy in testing, cost savings through reductions in outside labor costs (such as coding), and faster turnaround time in updating apps

The telecommunications industry is working hard to make the transition from 5G to 6G a reality. The General Services Administration reported last year that the target for establishing 6G as the commercial standard is 2030, because it will require research, innovation, and international agreement on new interoperability standards.

Over the course of three sessions, thought leaders in government and industry will discuss the opportunities and technical advancements being explored, including a closer look at two of the most significant projects now underway to prepare for a 6G-enabled world.

Session 1: OCUDU – The Search for Open Source Hardware

OCUDU (Open Centralized Unit/Distributed Unit) is a collaborative initiative and open-source project, hosted by the Linux Foundation, aimed at accelerating the development and deployment of 5G and 6G Open Radio Access Networks (Open RAN). It provides a common, carrier-grade, open-source software foundation for the CU and DU layers, which are critical components of radio access networks. The intent of OCUDU is to break vendor lock-in and accelerate the transition from proprietary, hardware-locked RAN systems to software-defined, open ecosystems.

• Amanda Toman, Director, Public Wireless Chain Supply Innovation Fund, NTIA
• Dr. David Kirkwood, Program Manager, OCUDU, OUSW R&E FutureG

Session 2: Turning Mobile Devices into Radar

Integrated Sensing and Communication (ISAC) is a 6G technology that enables wireless networks to simultaneously transmit data and detect objects, essentially turning mobile networks into radars. It uses shared radio signals, infrastructure, and hardware to track, locate, and image objects in real-time, improving network efficiency and enabling new, high-precision services. ISAC reduces hardware costs and saves spectrum resources by consolidating functions. It is considered a cornerstone of 6G, enabling faster, more reliable communication.

• Tyrell Junis, Co-Founder & Chief Operating Officer, Tiami Networks

Session 3: Maximizing 5G While Waiting for 6G – the Role of AI

Today’s advanced 5G networks are the essential first step to create an intelligent digital fabric. They provide higher upload speeds and open network interfaces for developers to use. They also make networks more programmable and easier to automate. So while the future may be 6G, investments made today into building out 5G and 5G standalone (5G SA) networks will not be stranded; they enable AI apps today and will be incorporated into the rollout of 6G tomorrow.

• Brian Vu, Cybersecurity & Enterprise Infrastructure Solutions Architect, GSA (Pending Approval)
• Anthony Lawson, Field Chief Technology Officer, Ericsson
• Victor Spahic, Executive Leader, T-Moble Secure Federal Operations

Learning Objectives

• Understand the components and processes that comprise Open RAN systems
• Evaluate your agency’s systems and the groundwork that can be done now to prepare for open source hardware
• Identify the system requirements to incorporate ISAC into your agency’s edge devices
• Delineate steps to maximize AI use in ISAC-enabled networks, including assessment of available databases and their cleanliness
• Determine what additional information needs to be gathered to utilize ISAC capabilities
• Delineate the investments your agency has planned and how they can adapt to 6G in future use
• Begin building a plan to harness 6G capabilities to enhance your agency’s performance and achievement of mission

Getting new capability into the field shouldn’t take years. When the mission demands change, organizations need solutions that can be deployed quickly and perform in real operational environments, even when connectivity is limited.

The U.S. military is learning what changes after a capability is fielded, from faster mission workflows to more reliable operations, and how those lessons can inform future deployments. The U.S. Army staged Project Convergence-Capstone 6 (PCC6) in late July to rigorously experiment with future technologies by significantly expanding the scope, scale and complexity of operations tested in earlier exercises.

Learning Objectives:

• Examine how the PCC6 exercise went from delivery to mission operations in months
• Review how mission operations continued when network connectivity was limited
• Outline how one successful deployment can accelerate future fielding
• Evaluate why time to value determines mission impact

Military units often operate in austere environments, far from the secure cloud networks and multilayered cyber defenses of a traditional headquarters. Tasked with no-fail missions, these units depend on constant, secure access to their most critical resource: the network. The Zero Trust principle of “never trust, always verify” — controlling who can access what and limiting lateral (east-west) movement between applications — is both Government-mandated and mission-critical.

Identity, Credential, and Access Management (ICAM) provides the foundation for Zero Trust through continuous identity and access verification. In disconnected and air-gapped scenarios (DDIL), missions must still proceed during disruption from weather, terrain, and adversary activity. A robust ICAM solution bridges the gap between high-level enterprise security and the tactical edge by planning for network loss with pre-synchronization and re-synchronization techniques.

Learning Objectives:

• Understand what ICAM is and how it fits within a Zero Trust framework
• Outline how using ICAM and ZT meet and maintain federal mandates
• Evaluate the costs and benefits of maintaining high-level connectivity and security in contested environments

Public sector organizations are operating in an increasingly complex environment shaped by evolving cyber threats, aging infrastructure, workforce shortages and growing expectations for modern digital services.

AI-driven attacks are expanding the threat landscape while legacy systems and fragmented data make it harder for agencies and institutions to respond quickly. At the same time, constituents, staff and students expect faster, more intuitive services similar to what they experience in the private sector.

To keep pace, government and education organizations are modernizing IT operations, strengthening endpoint security and adopting automation and AI to improve both cybersecurity and service delivery.

Learning Objectives:

• Understand what ICAM is and how it fits within a Zero Trust framework
• Outline how using ICAM and ZT meet and maintain federal mandates
• Evaluate the costs and benefits of maintaining high-level connectivity and security in contested environments

AI introduces new vulnerabilities – such as data leakage, model manipulation, and uncontrolled access – even as agencies are still figuring out how existing risk and security frameworks apply. Recent news articles have reported that Anthropic’s newest AI model, Mythos, found 2,000 vulnerabilities in just seven weeks of testing commercially available software; Mozilla, for instance, reported Mythos identified 271 security vulnerabilities in Firefox 150. There have been instances where security teams are pulled in late and asked to “make it safe” after deployment decisions are already underway.

There are cybersecurity constructs in place that can help control access to AI tools and data. For example, the Zero Trust mandate already in place – “never trust, always verify” – strengthens requirements for access. Having an “identity-first” security structure can minimize the risks associated with AI adoption.

Learning Objectives:

• Identify existing cybersecurity weaknesses in existing processes, such as where security is being bypassed or bolted on too late
• Understand how to apply Zero Trust concepts to AI workflows
• Confirm cybersecurity alignment with guidance provided by the National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)

Major, globally visible events—such as the World Cup or Olympic Games—fundamentally change how cyber-physical risk must be identified and prioritized. Events such as these usually are designated as National Special Security Events (NSSEs), based on factors like national significance, projected attendance, and potential threat levels, with the U.S. Secret Service leading security operations.

Cyber-physical risk is the potential for cyberattacks on networked systems—such as IoT devices, industrial control systems, or medical equipment—to cause real-world damage, including physical injury, environmental catastrophes, or destruction of infrastructure. These risks occur at the intersection of digital, networked software and physical, mechanical processes. NSSEs increase the potential for attacks on such devices as credential readers, environmental control systems (heating, cooling, and water), and hospitals near the events.

Join us as thought leaders from government and industry discuss how organizations can prepare to support a major event by identifying, quantifying, and prioritizing cyber-physical risks pertaining to operational technologies (OT) deployed for the event.

Learning Objectives:

• Understand the distinct risks to OT in major event environments, especially when systems are temporary, shared across public and private owners, or rapidly deployed
• Identify which OT-related threats or vulnerabilities tend to have the most significant downstream or cascading impacts, and which are most often underestimated during planning
• Learn how to assess and model cyber-physical risk across interconnected systems, such as venues, transportation, and broadcast infrastructure
• Delineate what effective integration between cybersecurity, physical security, and operational stakeholders looks like in practice – and where it breaks down most often

In a time of rapid change spurred by AI, the federal conversation about cybersecurity is becoming less about individual technologies or modalities and more about operational effectiveness. Agencies have invested heavily in cybersecurity, yet many still struggle to answer critical questions quickly enough to reduce risk.

Meanwhile, security tools have multiplied faster than agencies’ ability to make coordinated trust decisions. The technology stack has evolved, but security decisions haven’t. Common frustrations include tools that don’t work together the way agencies’ missions do; more data available than ever but less confidence in making decisions; and security decisions that require too much manual coordination across disconnected systems.

Learning Objectives:

• Identify ways to make trust dynamic – responding in real time to real threats – rather than assume trust
• Outline methods to enable AI without creating security blind spots
• Review steps you can take to make faster, more confident security decisions for your agency, such as network segmentation/microsegmentation, using AI to control traffic flow to prevent data loss

After the hard work of assessing cyber-physical risks in advance of National Special Security Events (NSSEs) such as the Olympics or World Cup, the next step is discussing systemic vulnerabilities and planning for blind spots. Every major event runs on a complex, interconnected web of systems, yet the full chain of critical dependencies is rarely mapped and tested. 

This session explores complex “what if” scenarios that challenged common assumptions underlying security and resilience planning, with a particular focus on limited visibility into the operational technology (OT) environments connected to IT systems. 

Join us as thought leaders from government and industry share how they approach mapping dependencies, looking for unsuspected connections, and work to avoid making assumptions about roles and responsibilities. 

Learning Objectives:

• Outline the process for “gaming out” possible scenarios
• Establish methods for decision-making during moments of uncertainty or ambiguity
• Evaluate criteria for partnerships to strengthen responses
• Delineate best practices for developing effective incident response plans at a scale appropriate to the NSSE
  Identify where regulatory frameworks may conflict with operational needs

• How cyber incidents escalate into a kinetic attack, affecting the ability to respond to the critical incident

• What first responders need to manage the incident

• What preparations should be made in advance of a critical event

• When a cyber incident escalates into real-world public safety impacts, how CISA defines its operational role in the first 24–72 hours—coordinating with DHS components, FEMA, state and local emergency management, and private sector owners—while balancing the need for decisive federal coordination with respect for state authority and private ownership

• The importance of executing a coordinated recovery plan to rapidly restore safety and service to the event

AI success is often isolated, limited to pilot efforts that tackle one specific challenge or workflow. AI pilots are most focused on getting the technology right; implementing an enterprisewide AI strategy requires alignment across leadership, workforce, procurement, and mission teams, though definitions of success, ownership, and ROI remain unclear.

How agencies can move beyond the isolated success in a pilot and achieve similar results across their organizations is more a strategic challenge than a technical one. It requires shifting from a use case to capability, from technology experiment to an operational effort, by prioritizing scalable infrastructure, robust data governance, and change management.

Learning Objectives:

• Identify organizational and work culture barriers that need to be addressed
• Review your agency’s budget and procurement activities to ensure funding is available as scaling up takes place
• Delineate your agency’s automation and AI priorities to maximize both effectiveness and impact