Systems designed specifically to collect data on cyber threats are duplicating traditional intelligence systems and are ”wasting money,” a Raytheon executive told a group of reporters at a company briefing on ISR systems July 10 at the Farnborough International Airshow.

“Government customers view these missions as being interrelated and integrally mutually supportive, and so to the extent that people with an agenda, whether they’re government people or industry people who want to drive the scenario into duplication of the ISR mission, to support a cyber mission, that doesn’t make sense to us,” said Brooke Griffith, director of international business development for Raytheon. “We happen to have really strong footprints in both of those areas and we can say with some assurance, it’s not necessary to do that. And so if you do do that, you’re wasting money.”

Griffith said signals intelligence (SIGINT) and cyber are largely similar in the eyes of experts.

“From the standpoint of customers in the U.S. and customers in the U.K., and customers in other areas, there’s not much in the way of distinction between SIGINT and cyber,” Griffith said.

In particular, Griffith pointed to companies without substantial intelligence systems experience as promoting the concept of independent systems. Raytheon, which engineers many of the world’s intelligence systems, would likely gain significant cyber business if countries used only intelligence systems instead of turning to new cyber capabilities.

“To the extent that a company or one of our competitors might want to play in the cyber arena, but doesn’t have a footprint with intelligence community customers, they’re going to say, ‘you need to build a whole new search and track system, an intel gathering system for your cyber capability,’” he said.

“The reality is, a lot of that stuff already exists.”