Sr Systems Security Engineer

We need to output HTML fragment with sections: headings

for sections like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. Only include sections that have real specific content. We must not repeat job title as heading. Must not include Job ID etc. Must preserve all substantive info, no invention. Remove boilerplate: cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning, duplicated lines, application instructions. Also remove "Important Notice" maybe? It's about clearance, which is substantive? It's about security clearance requirement; that's part of qualifications maybe. It's not boilerplate; it's a requirement. So we need to include that info. We need to parse the posting. Let's extract sections: - Intro paragraph: "If you like solving complex IT and security problems using your deep analytical skills, this is the opportunity for you! As a Senior Systems Security Engineer, you will lead the design and implementation of our security infrastructure. You will manage complex security projects, provide strategic direction for security practices, and mentor junior engineers. The ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance), Aviation, and Security (IAS) business area is a leader in ISR and aviation, it is a leading prime manned and unmanned aircraft systems integrator for innovative, high-performance ISR and aviation systems. Its end-to-end Command, Control, Computers, Communications and Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance (C4ISR) capabilities encompass design, integration, test, certification, ground/flight training and complete logistics support. IAS tailors solutions to customer cost, performance, and schedule requirements and designs to consistently exceed expectations – with an unrivaled record of on time and on (or under) budget deliveries." That's about the role. Could be "About the role" or maybe "Overview". We'll use

About the role

and put that paragraph(s) in

. - Responsibilities: The block after "Responsibilities". It includes a paragraph describing role, then bullet-like sentences? Actually it's a paragraph with many details. We'll treat as prose

. No explicit list. So we can put under

Responsibilities

with

containing the text. - Qualifications: There's "Qualifications You Must Have" then a long list of requirements. Then "Qualifications We Prefer". Also "Essential Functions". Also "Estimated Starting Salary Range". Also "SNC offers annual incentive pay ...". Also "SNC offers a generous benefit package...". Also "Important Notice" about clearance. Also other paragraphs about SNC. We need to decide sections: Qualifications (must have), Preferred Qualifications (maybe under Qualifications or separate). Benefits, Pay, Schedule? There's schedule? Not explicit schedule; maybe "Ability to work primarily at a computer for extended periods." etc. That's more about essential functions. Not schedule. We have Pay: "Estimated Starting Salary Range: $143,487.14 - $197,294.82." plus note about compensation varies etc. Also "SNC offers annual incentive pay based upon performance that is commensurate with the level of the position." That's pay info. Benefits: "SNC offers a generous benefit package, including medical, dental, and vision plans, 401(k) with 150% match up to 6%, life insurance, 3 weeks paid time off, tuition reimbursement, and more." Schedule: Not given explicitly. There's "Ability to work primarily at a computer for extended periods." "Capability to participate in on-call rotation for incident response." "Must be able to lift up to 25 lbs occasionally." "Ability to work in an office or hybrid environment." "Occasional travel may be required." That's more about work conditions, not schedule. Could be under "Schedule" but not explicit schedule like hours. The instruction says only create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections if posting actually states them. It does not state schedule like "full-time", "40 hrs/week". So we should not create Schedule section. We should create Benefits section. We should create Pay section. We should create Qualifications section (must have). Possibly also Preferred Qualifications as a subsection? Could be under Qualifications with two

or

. But we need to follow rule: use
• for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. The qualifications are a list; we should format as
  • items. Similarly responsibilities maybe list but it's prose; but we can still use
    if it's list. However the responsibilities block is not bullet list; it's sentences. We'll keep as

    . For qualifications, we have many items separated by periods. Could break into list items. We'll need to preserve all info; we can convert each sentence into

    • . Must not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to capture each requirement. Let's extract the "Qualifications You Must Have" block: "You Must Have Bachelor's degree in Systems Security, Network Engineering, Information Technology, or related Engineering discipline. 8+ years of experience in IT security or a related field. Relevant experience can be considered as a substitute for the required educational qualifications. In the absence of a degree, a minimum of 16 years of related experience is required. Higher level relevant degree may substitute for experience. A minimum of 8 years in a formal ISSM role with direct ATO package ownership and government AO interface responsibility. Deep expertise in cybersecurity principles and practices. Experience with security frameworks and standards such as National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), ISO 27001. Demonstrated experience to describe configuring scan policies, executing credentialed scans, interpreting results, and building Tenable dashboards from personal execution, not oversight. Demonstrated hands-on Splunk SIEM experience — developing correlation searches, dashboards, and security use cases; triaging SIEM alerts; and managing Splunk forwarder deployments. Active DISA STIG application experience — must have personally applied STIGs to live systems, not just reviewed or documented STIG compliance. Ability to describe specific STIG finding categories, compensating control documentation, and POA&M management. Demonstrated experience presenting security posture to government stakeholders — has personally briefed at government security reviews, ARBs, or AO-level meetings. Not supported a presenter — led the brief. Deep working knowledge of NIST 800-53 Rev 5 — can explain control families, tailoring rationale, control inheritance, and assessment procedures without reference material. Demonstrated RMF/ATO lifecycle ownership — has personally developed SSPs, SARs, POA&Ms, and security assessment evidence packages and presented them to a government AO for authorization decision. Working knowledge of DCSA DAAG requirements for classified IS accreditation — has operated within a DCSA-governed program environment and coordinated with DCSA field representatives. Working knowledge of CMMC framework — understands Level 2/3 practice domains, assessment objectives, and CUI protection requirements. Has authored or substantially contributed to PPSM documentation — understands port/protocol justification requirements, DoD PPSM registry process, and PPSM enforcement mechanisms. Demonstrate hands on proficiency on the following areas: Nessus / Tenable.sc, Tenable Dashboard Creation ELK Stack (Elastic/Kibana), Splunk SIEM, DISA STIGs / SRGs, eMASS / XACTA, RHEL / Linux, vSphere/VMware, GitLab / GitHub, Bash Scripting, CPU / System Architecture, PKI / Certificate Mgmt, NIST 800-53 Rev 5, RMF / ATO Process, DCSA DAAPM, CMMC Level 2/3, TEMPEST Requirements, PPSM Creation Current/Active Top Secret U.S. Security Clearance with SCI eligibility is required." We need to keep all that. Then "Qualifications We Prefer" block: "CISSP (Certified Information Systems Security Professional) — active certification preferred. CISM, CASP+, or equivalent senior-level security certification. IAM Level III or IAT Level III baseline certification required per DoD 8570/8140. GitLab Certified Associate or GitHub Advanced Security certification. Red Hat Certified System Administrator (RHCSA) or equivalent Linux administration certification. Experience with Tenable Security Center (SC) enterprise deployment — multi-scanner architecture, repository management, and organizational reporting hierarchy configuration. Familiarity with cross-domain solutions (CDS) and data transfer guard administration in classified multi-domain environments. Experience with Zero Trust architecture implementation — network segmentation, identity-based access enforcement, and micro-segmentation concepts applied in a DoD program context. Proficient in IT project management practices with a solid understanding of PMI/PMP frameworks, including planning, monitoring, controlling, and risk management. Working knowledge of JIRA to manage and track Earned Value tasks, including schedule performance, cost performance, and workflow status Experience managing multidisciplinary RMF teams and executing security assessments in accordance with DoDI 8510.01, NIST SP 800‑53A, CNSSI 1253, and program‑level authorization processes" We could treat as separate section "Preferred Qualifications" but instruction only lists standard headings: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. There's no "Preferred Qualifications". Could fold into Qualifications as part of same section, maybe separate

      heading "Preferred Qualifications:" but that would be a heading inside? Not allowed to create extra headings beyond those? It says use

      for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). It doesn't forbid other headings, but says "include a section ONLY when the posting has real, specific content for it — never emit a heading followed by filler/placeholder text". It doesn't forbid other headings, but to be safe we could incorporate preferred qualifications under Qualifications as a

      or

      with a note. Similarly "Essential Functions" block: "Ability to work primarily at a computer for extended periods. Capability to participate in on-call rotation for incident response. Must be able to lift up to 25 lbs occasionally. Ability to work in an office or hybrid environment. Occasional travel may be required. This posting will be open for application for a minimum of 5 days and may be extended based on business needs." We could treat essential functions as part of Qualifications or maybe as "Requirements"? There's a "Requirements" heading in the list. Could use Requirements for essential functions. But we already have Qualifications. The instruction list includes Requirements as a possible heading. We could put essential functions under Requirements. However the posting already has a "Qualifications You Must Have" and "Qualifications We Prefer". The essential functions are more like physical/working conditions. Could be under Requirements. But we need to avoid duplication. Let's decide: - About the role: intro paragraph. - Responsibilities: responsibilities block. - Qualifications: must have qualifications (maybe as
      ). - Preferred Qualifications: could be under Qualifications as a separate

      heading "Preferred Qualifications:" but that's not an

      . Could just add a

      with bold? Not allowed to add extra headings? The instruction only says use

      for section headings (list). It doesn't forbid other markup like

      with strong. So we can include a

      with "Preferred Qualifications:" then a

      . That seems okay. - Benefits: benefits paragraph. - Pay: salary range and incentive pay. - Possibly "Requirements": essential functions and maybe clearance? But clearance is already in qualifications. We could put essential functions under Requirements. - Skills: maybe we could list technical skills from qualifications? But we already have qualifications list includes skills. Could create Skills section summarizing hands-on proficiency areas. But that would be duplicative. Better to not create Skills if not explicitly stated. The posting does not have a separate "Skills" heading. So we