CMMC 2.0 Scoping Guidance Limits the Scope of Cybersecurity Assessments
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.23.21
The Department of Defense (DoD) recently released the initial guidance documents for Version 2.0 of its Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) program, including its much-anticipated Scoping Guidance. While the guidance documents generally adhere to the current requirements for the protection of Federal Contract Information (FCI) and Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), the Scoping Guidance includes notable developments. Chief among them is the introduction of two asset categories — “Specialized Assets” and “Contractor Risk Managed Assets” — that could potentially limit the scope of a contractor’s CMMC assessment, as well as the number and types of assets to be assessed against the applicable CMMC practices.
- Specialized Assets include government property; internet of things (IoT) and industrial internet of things (IIoT) devices; operational technology; systems configured based entirely on government requirements and used to support a contract; and test equipment.
- Contractor Risk Managed Assets include computing resources that are capable of handling CUI but are prevented from doing so by the contractor’s security policies, procedures, and practices.
Contractors expecting to be subject to CMMC should carefully review the Scoping Guidance, as well as the other guidance documents, to determine whether and how they may wish to limit the scope of CMMC’s applicability.
Contacts

Partner and Crowell Global Advisors Senior Director
- Washington, D.C.
- D | +1.202.624.2698
- Washington, D.C. (CGA)
- D | +1 202.624.2500
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 10.30.26
Recent sustain decisions by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC and Reliance Test & Technology send a clear message: when an agency tries to fix a Procurement Integrity Act (PIA) violation by committing a second one, the cure can be just as fatal as the disease. The cases involved the U.S. Air Force’s $1.8 billion procurement for O&M services at Elgin Air Force Base. During discussions, the Air Force inadvertently released a pricing overview slide with all offerors’ bottom-line evaluated costs to Reliance Test & Technology, which immediately notified the agency of the error. In response, the Air Force decided to level the playing field by providing the same information to all the other offerors in the procurement, stating, “[o]fferors may consider this disclosure in their [final proposal revision].”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.29.26
What University Licensors Should Learn From TexasLDPC v. Broadcom
Client Alert | 2 min read | 10.28.26
Debriefing to Dead Briefing: How to Avoid Dismissal by Identifying “Required” Debriefings
