Key Takeaways
- Research security has become a pressing national‑security priority as foreign actors seek to exploit unclassified, federally funded research.
- The threat landscape now extends beyond classic espionage to include grant‑making processes, international collaborations, and disclosure practices.
- The Department of Defense (DoD) has issued new policies and decision‑making frameworks that emphasize risk‑based due diligence for both funders and grant recipients.
- Universities and federal funding agencies are adapting by strengthening compliance programs, improving vetting of foreign partners, and closing disclosure gaps.
- Insights from allied approaches—particularly Canada’s research‑security model—offer useful templates for U.S. policy and practice.
- Expert perspectives, such as those from Mark Franco of Digital Science, highlight the importance of integrating open‑source intelligence, internal data, and cross‑functional collaboration.
- The webinar provides one CPE credit in Business Management & Organization for participants who answer all polling questions.
- A measured, risk‑based approach—balancing academic openness with security safeguards—is presented as the best practice for protecting government‑funded innovation.
Introduction and Webinar Overview
The Breaking Defense live webinar scheduled for June 24, 2026 at 2 p.m. ET (11 a.m. PT) convenes a panel of experts to examine the evolving U.S. research‑security landscape. Titled “Research security and the effort to protect federally funded innovation,” the session offers one Continuing Professional Education (CPE) credit in Business Management & Organization. Attendees will learn how the Department of Defense’s renewed focus on safeguarding technical research is reshaping policies at the federal‑funding level and within universities and other research institutions. The agenda covers why research security has risen to urgent national‑security status, how foreign actors exploit largely unclassified research environments, recent DoD policy updates, compliance strategies for funding agencies and universities, and lessons from partner models such as Canada’s.
Why Research Security Has Emerged as a More Urgent National Security Issue
Over the past few years, the intersection of basic and applied research with national security has intensified. Federal agencies now recognize that adversaries can harvest valuable technical knowledge not only through covert espionage but also by leveraging the openness inherent in academia. Grant‑making mechanisms, collaborative research agreements, and publication practices create multiple vectors for unintended technology transfer. As a result, policymakers view research security as a critical line of defense against the erosion of U.S. technological advantage, prompting a shift from reactive measures to proactive, institution‑wide risk management frameworks.
How Foreign Actors Can Exploit Largely Unclassified Research Environments
Although much of the research funded by the government remains unclassified, its scientific and engineering insights can be strategically valuable to foreign states. Adversaries employ tactics such as sponsoring joint research projects, establishing scholarships or fellowships that grant access to labs, and exploiting conference presentations or pre‑print servers to harvest data. They may also infiltrate supply chains or partner with U.S. companies that receive federal funds, thereby indirectly gaining access to sensitive know‑how. The webinar will detail these exploitation pathways, illustrating how seemingly benign academic exchanges can be weaponized when adequate safeguards are absent.
DoD’s Recent Policy and Decision‑Making Updates
In response to the growing threat, the Department of Defense has issued a series of policy memoranda and guidance documents that tighten oversight of federally funded research. Key updates include mandatory security reviews for grants involving certain technology areas, enhanced vetting of foreign nationals participating in DoD‑sponsored projects, and the requirement for institutions to implement risk‑based due‑diligence procedures. The DoD now encourages funding agencies to treat research security as an integral component of the grant lifecycle—from proposal evaluation through award management and close‑out—rather than an after‑the‑fact compliance checkbox.
How Funding Agencies and Universities Are Approaching Research‑Security Compliance
Both federal funding agencies and academic institutions are adopting more structured compliance programs. Agencies are integrating security questionnaires into grant applications, establishing dedicated research‑security offices, and leveraging data analytics to monitor collaboration footprints. Universities, meanwhile, are creating institutional review boards that assess international partnerships, training faculty and staff on disclosure obligations, and deploying technology‑solution platforms that flag potential risks in real time. The emphasis is on building a culture of responsibility where researchers understand that protecting national security is compatible with, and even supportive of, scientific openness when proper controls are in place.
International Partner Models: Lessons from Canada
Canada’s research‑security framework offers a instructive counterpart for U.S. policymakers. The Canadian model emphasizes a whole‑of‑government approach, coordinating Public Safety Canada, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, and research‑funding bodies such as the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council. Key features include mandatory security screening for foreign collaborators, a clear disclosure hierarchy, and the use of shared threat‑intelligence platforms that allow agencies to disseminate alerts quickly. By studying Canada’s balance of openness and protection, U.S. stakeholders can identify best practices—such as standardized risk‑scoring tools and joint training exercises—that may be adapted to the American context.
Research Security Perspective: Mark Franco, Digital Science
Mark Franco, Vice President of Research Security & Intelligence at Digital Science, will share practical insights on detecting and mitigating threats to U.S. military‑related intellectual property. His presentation will cover how organizations can combine open‑source intelligence (OSINT), proprietary data feeds, and internal audit trails to build a comprehensive threat picture. Franco will also discuss the importance of cross‑functional collaboration—bringing together legal, compliance, IT, and research‑administration teams—to ensure that security measures are both effective and minimally disruptive to scientific progress. Real‑world case studies will illustrate how timely identification of disclosure gaps or anomalous collaboration patterns can prevent inadvertent technology transfer.
Learning Objectives and CPE Credit Details
Participants who attend the full webinar and respond to all three polling questions will be eligible for one CPE credit in the Business Management & Organization field of study. The learning objectives outlined for the session include: understanding the policy push to better protect basic and applied research; grasping the tension between academic openness and national‑security requirements; learning how institutions assess collaboration, funding, and disclosure risks; distinguishing inadvertent omissions from more serious misconduct; exploring how research‑security programs can integrate data from multiple functions; and visualizing what a measured, risk‑based approach looks like in practice. These objectives are designed to equip attendees with actionable knowledge they can apply to their own organizations’ research‑security programs.
Conclusion: Toward a Measured, Risk‑Based Approach
The overarching message of the webinar is that effective research security does not require sacrificing the openness that fuels scientific breakthroughs. Instead, institutions should adopt a risk‑based mindset—identifying high‑sensitivity areas, applying proportionate controls, and continuously monitoring for emerging threats. By leveraging updated DoD policies, refining internal compliance mechanisms, drawing on allied models such as Canada’s, and integrating expert guidance from professionals like Mark Franco, universities and federal agencies can better safeguard federally funded innovation while preserving the collaborative spirit essential to scientific advancement.