Universities have thrived for centuries as open forums where ideas flow freely, but their growing entanglement with defense and national security is creating what can be called "the secured academy." This transformation isn't merely about implementing new security controls—it represents a collision of worlds where academic freedom meets national security imperatives.
At a recent EDUCAUSE conference, security experts from major universities gathered to explore this tension through the lens of CMMC compliance. The panel featured practitioners on the frontlines of this change:
- Damon Armour, Director of Information Security, Risk & Assurance, North Carolina State University
- Jeremy Hopkins, Associate Director of IT Security, Duke University
- Chris Kurtz, Director of Research Technology Infrastructure and Cybersecurity, Arizona State University
- Kolin Hodgson, Research Security and Compliance Program Manager, University of Notre Dame
- Wendy Epley, Principal Analyst, Information Security GRC, The University of Arizona
- Trevor Foskett, VP of Solutions Engineering, Virtru
These professionals shared a common challenge: getting researchers to engage with CMMC requirements when those researchers are naturally focused on their scientific work, not compliance. They discussed how researchers at their universities express understandable frustration about CMMC's scope and requirements—not just complaining about paperwork, but reacting to a fundamental challenge to how scientific research has traditionally operated.
Their insights highlighted the delicate balance they must strike: satisfying security requirements while preserving the open culture that has defined academic research for generations.
Recommended Reading: R1 Universities Meeting CMMC 2.0: Balancing Security and Innovation
The Hidden Costs of Compliance: Beyond Technology Investments
Everyone talks about the technology costs of compliance, but the panel zeroed in on something more crucial: staffing topped the list of challenges. This points to the real price of CMMC that nobody's calculating—the intellectual opportunity cost.
The compliance specialists recognized that every researcher hour spent wrestling with compliance documentation is an hour not spent pushing scientific boundaries. Every brilliant mind diverted to security processes is brainpower diverted from discovery. This invisible tax on innovation dwarfs what shows up in IT budgets. When these security professionals advocated to "give the minutes back to science," they were highlighting their commitment to minimizing disruption to the research process while still meeting security requirements.
From Gatekeepers to Enablers: Security's New Role in Research Excellence
The panel emphasized that the old model of security professionals as the campus fun police is dead—or at least, it should be. The IT security leaders made this clear when they stated bluntly: "Security is part of the research."
These compliance and security specialists see themselves evolving from obstacle-creators to problem-solvers. The most forward-thinking universities are integrating security experts directly into research teams, where they design protection frameworks that work with scientific methods instead of against them—allowing researchers to focus on what they do best.
Recommended Reading: How Universities Meet CMMC 2.0 Requirements Despite Nationwide Research Budget Cuts
The Data Liberation Movement: Securing Information, Not Locations
Elizabeth Cole Walker from NCSU pointed out that "Universities cannot just think about CMMC from the perspective of the enclave—they need to think about the data.” This data-centric approach breaks protected information free from walled gardens and allows it to move where research actually happens.
The panel acknowledged that research is messy, collaborative, and rarely confined to neat boxes. The security professionals' observation that "surprising how much science happens in Excel and SharePoints" wasn't just an amusing aside—it was an acknowledgment that effective security solutions must adapt to how researchers actually work, rather than forcing researchers to change their proven methods.
Competitive Advantage Through Security Maturity
Smart universities are waking up to a new reality: CMMC compliance isn't just about avoiding penalties—it's becoming a competitive edge in the research funding game. The security experts noted that as federal agencies tighten security requirements, schools with mature security practices will get first dibs on the most cutting-edge research opportunities.
These compliance specialists are working to position their institutions to view security not as a necessary evil but as a strategic asset that opens doors to premier research domains. It's a complete flip of the script: security is transforming from cost center to strategic advantage—an argument that helps them gain buy-in from research-focused faculty.
The Birth of Secure Science
What we witnessed at the EDUCAUSE panel of security professionals was the early days of what we might call "secure science"—a new research model where protecting sensitive information becomes as fundamental to the process as peer review or experimental design, but implemented in ways that respect researchers' workflows.
Universities that thrive in this new paradigm won't be those that grudgingly implement controls or create clunky security enclaves. As these compliance specialists emphasized, the winners will be institutions that seamlessly blend security into their research DNA, creating environments where protection enhances rather than hinders discovery.
CMMC isn't just another compliance framework—it's forcing a reimagination of academic research itself. These security professionals are working to ensure that how universities respond to this challenge will determine not just their compliance status, but their relevance in an era where security and scientific advancement are becoming inseparable.
