Some Government Agencies Leery Of Non-U.S. Products

While some federal systems integrators said they have encountered little resistance from clients when they suggest products from Canada, Finland, Germany, Israel and other countries, others said it's best to pitch products from U.S.-based firms.

"It's an issue in the public sector space," said Scott Rover, business development manager at Chantilly, Va.-based GTSI's mobile and wireless team.

\

Using overseas products in government implementations, particularly security-related ones, is a touchy issue.

The odds of getting a product into a defense agency from a company that has its headquarters or research and development unit located outside the United States "depend on how much pain you are [alleviating for the client," Rover said. If the "pain is so great and the solution overcomes it," then a military or defense agency still might consider a product designed, coded or manufactured outside the United States, he said.

A good example is Blackberry, the wireless communications device from Research in Motion, a Toronto-based company. "We've had defense [clients look at us in a jaundiced way and say, 'That data is going up to Canada,' " Rover said. But communications to and from the Blackberry are encrypted, and the device is certified to the Common Criteria, aiding its acceptance among GTSI clients, he added.

id
unit-1659132512259
type
Sponsored post

The Common Criteria are standards by which the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the National Security Agency certify firewalls and other IT products. All security products sold to the government must attain Common Criteria certification.

Yet even with Common Criteria certification, some products from foreign manufacturers still raise eyebrows among officials procuring hardware and software in U.S. Department of Defense agencies, solution providers said.

For example, Israel's software development business has grown exponentially in recent years, but software from Israeli firms like Check Point Software Technologies and Finjan are still more readily accepted by civilian agencies and commercial clients, said Bruce Tucker, CEO of Patriot Technologies, Frederick, Md. Patriot's IT engagements are primarily with the U.S. government.

Scott Armstrong, director of federal sales for Check Point, said that in recent months, after years of resistance, Check Point's Firewall-1 product has been approved for use in Department of Defense organizations such as the U.S. Army and the Defense Information Systems Agency. The concern, he said, had been based on the fact that Check Point has its headquarters in Israel.

"We certified [Firewall-1 to Common Criteria in October 1999," Armstrong said. Getting that certification helped a lot in terms of opening doors at the defense agencies, he added. Check Point is in the process of getting Firewall-1 certified at a higher Common Criteria rating, Armstrong said. Typically, agencies that deal with matters of national defense and security must procure IT security products that have been granted the highest Common Criteria certification.

Not every federal solution provider has encountered these issues, which may be largely confined to security products. Charles Prow, PricewaterhouseCoopers' partner responsible for the firm's federal services delivery efforts, said he has had no conflicts with clients about the origins of a product. Germany-based SAP has a large federal presence, he said.

On the flip side, Chris Neff, vice president of marketing at National Information Consortium, a government solution provider in Overland Park, Kan., said the company is developing e-procurement applications for the British government, which is aware,and isn't concerned,that the software was developed in the United States.