It's not the hardware, it's the crap that runs on it. You want a system which is secure and usable? Time for the DoD to commission their own OS. "Nobody will know how to use it!" is an objection which can be overcome by training, which is a thing that the armed forces understand. "It won't be compatible with the COTS!" is an advantage, not a disadvantage. "It will take too long and cost too much!" means that they are…
We talk craptons about "innovation" and torrents of words on "cybersecurity" yet underpin daily life on recursive kludges on 1980s operating system and software technology. It's quite Kafkaesque!
This isn't just a matter of "spending more on IT" - they likely already spend too much. It's just spending on the wrong things.
No amount of layering crap on top will overcome the rotten, slapdash foundations of systems like windows, nor the diverging motivations between MS and and their customers. Especially customers like the U.S. Government. The amount of vendor lock-in to the shitty MS ecosystem, begetting atrocities like critical data living on godforsaken Sharepoint, is profoundly saddening. It's remarkable how everyone just uses hardware that's orders of magnitude faster than 1990s computers, yet interactions are far slower.
I once tried (reluctantly) connecting my USG-issued laptop onto my fairly locked-down home network. The amount of spew it continually issued onto the network was disgusting and I just disconnected it and drove in to complete whatever mandatory update they demanded.
Instead of creating yet another goddamn "cybersecurity czar", how about we try to take what we've learned in the past 40-50 years in computer science and try to properly engineer the software foundations for the next 30 years? This is absolutely something the USG could instigate and accomplish, if the initiative was run by the right people. I know some of them!