What’s next for CISA, NSA leadership and offensive cyber ops

Washington is getting a fresh reminder that offensive cyber policy doesn’t live in a silo. Leadership churn, workforce pressure and real-world operations are shaping the debate in real time.

On the latest episode of Cyber Focus, Frank Cilluffo spoke with cyber reporter David DiMolfetta, currently writing for Nextgov/FCW, about Sean Plankey’s renomination to lead the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and what months without a confirmed director can mean for an agency expected to set national direction on cyber risk. “CISA’s work does not stop,” DiMolfetta said. “That said, if you don’t have a permanent leader in place, you don’t have a guy to set direction, and things can’t really go anywhere.”

The conversation then moved to Lt. Gen. Joshua Rudd’s confirmation hearing last week to lead NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, and the recurring “dual hat” debate – whether one leader should continue overseeing both NSA’s intelligence mission and USCYBERCOM’s military mission. DiMolfetta also pointed to strain inside NSA, including morale concerns and reported staffing reductions.

The episode also touched on “Operation Absolute Resolve,” the campaign that reportedly included offensive cyber, and what it suggests about U.S. cyber capabilities. DiMolfetta noted that the reported effect in Caracas was brief: “Lights went off, but they also went back on,” and he argued that the precision matters. A disruption that can be triggered and then reversed points to access, control and operational confidence, and may be harder to execute than a blunt, long-lasting outage.

The discussion closed with DiMolfetta’s reporting on a China-linked breach targeting House staff email inboxes. He said he has not been able to independently confirm it was Salt Typhoon, and noted mixed signals about attribution, but added that what’s clear is the activity likely traced back to China. For Cilluffo, it underscored the stakes of deterrence: offensive cyber, used deliberately and communicated responsibly, can shape adversary behavior – especially when “lines” keep getting crossed.