Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

m.motherjones.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 156 posts

Re: The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

#101

Post by philwelch »

javert wrote: post #95
secthrowaway wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the work environments are pretty boring big-corp style stuff, except there's more locks on the doors and often you don't get any windows because people are stupid and open the blinds letting the world see what they're doing on their super squirrel network computer. If they do have windows, there's usually several layers of protection to prevent eavesdropping. There are many many networks, agency specific ones…

You said that there is no level strictly above Top Secret (just comparmentalizations within that). Is there any actual evidence for that? (I mean, non-classified evidence; I'm not asking you for classified information.) Where did you get the statistic about 1 in 50 to 70 Americans have had at least a Secret classification? That seems absurd. What are you talking about when you say "cut off from the outside world most…

Secret ain't really that secret. That's why they invented Top Secret. Seriously, if you add up all the military veterans and people who used to work in defense/government contracting who have had to access slightly classified information, that's not an unreasonable ratio.

Re: The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

#102

Post by philwelch »

secthrowaway wrote: post #81

Thought I'd make a throw away and tip in as there are lots of people here who've never had a clearance and don't really understand what it's all about (I've had one for more than a decade). I'll try and answer some questions in the threads as I can. In the U.S. here's how it works (I'm writing this from the perspective of a contractor): You are hired to work on a government contract, that contract requires you to wor…

I thought polygraphs didn't work. Or is there classified information showing that they do?

Re: The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

#103

Post by JonnieCache »

ramchip wrote: post #58
teyc wrote: post #8

If anyone has seen the comedy series "Yes, Prime Minister", they'll often understand how a leader can be manipulated by his mandarins through selective disclosure of uncorroborated information, present consequences couched in politically unacceptable terms, force the hand by setting the agenda. This is especially true if dissenting opinion is filtered before it gets handed to the President etc. I apologize if the fol…

I have no opinion regarding your post itself, but I'd like to point out that a comedy series is not evidence of anything. http://lesswrong.com/lw/k9/the_logical_fallacy_of_generaliza...

It is when it is written by political scientists who attended university with the politicians they later wrote the comedy about, interviewed serving politicians while posing as a think tank to gather info, took advice from other former executive politicians, and secretly consulted high-ranking civil servants for plot ideas, and lifted whole plots from people's then-unpublished memoirs.

Yes Minister is not a normal comedy series. It is bordering on a documentary.

Re: The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

#104

Post by arethuza »

teyc wrote: post #62
ramchip wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no opinion regarding your post itself, but I'd like to point out that a comedy series is not evidence of anything. http://lesswrong.com/lw/k9/the_logical_fallacy_of_generaliza...

I'm only trying to figure how Chalabi managed to fool the entire US intelligence machinery into invading Iraq, and the only logical conclusion is he couldn't. Facts were being created by the hawks and these people decides on who gets access to the President.

As far as I am aware, the decision making process started with a desire to invade Iraq and then once it was decided to do this any evidence that could justify this decision was collected and circulated (even if it came from someone who was known to be delusional).

Even worse, the UK government knew that there weren't good reasons to invade Iraq, but went along with it simply to keep in with the United States.

Re: The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

#105

Post by philwelch »

frisco wrote: post #43
firemanx wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's likely referring to the SCI status - the point of SCI, over and above just Secret or Top Secret, is that you have different "compartments" (clearances) for different categories of information. A guy with SCI working for the DOE would see much different information than a guy working for the DOD, or the FAA. And it's much more granular than that. I don't know anything about how the SCI compartments are created, o…

One thing I've always wondered about was what the President's clearance consists of. Are there things he doesn't have access to? Does he know he doesn't have access? Can he see a list of every secret program, but perhaps not get details? Does he have totally unfettered access to everything the US does? Edit: the corollary is, "how many people have access to everything?" or alternatively, "if the president doesn't, do…

I can think of two rationales for restricting the President's access to information.

One is plausible deniability: there's no need to expose the president personally to every misdeed everyone working for the government may have committed. Yes, that's a cynical, realpolitik type of answer that really pisses off people on HN, but it's true.

The other is simply that the President makes decisions at such a high level that low level information simply isn't helpful to him. The federal government is huge. The President can't function without hundreds of people who spend all day aggregating and summarizing information. This invests a lot of power in the aggregators and summarizers.

Re: The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

#106

Post by rmc »

mmaunder wrote: post #54

I wonder if any game theorists have thought about whether a country with no secrets could be militarily stronger. It's similar to the Linux vs Windows debate: at first glance it seems ludicrous that an open source OS could be more secure than a closed source OS. But with enough eyes and enthusiasts, all problems are quickly fixed. A small inner-circle who have access to the inner workings may find it hard to compete…

The "military secrets" to "source code" isn't an apt analogy. Lots of Linux OSs have secrets, such as SSL private keys, ssh private keys, passwords that sort of thing. Those are like military/government secrets. A (windows or linux) server that told everyone what the ssl private key and root passwords were, would, obviously, not be secure/

Re: The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

#107

Post by itmag »

wisty wrote: post #83
mmaunder wrote: post #54

I wonder if any game theorists have thought about whether a country with no secrets could be militarily stronger. It's similar to the Linux vs Windows debate: at first glance it seems ludicrous that an open source OS could be more secure than a closed source OS. But with enough eyes and enthusiasts, all problems are quickly fixed. A small inner-circle who have access to the inner workings may find it hard to compete…

Sure they have. IANA game theorist, but I think the conclusion is that some secrets are good, but the paramaters should generally be communicated. You didn't want to let the USSR know how many nukes you had (or they could come up with a stronger first strike plan). But you wanted them to know roughly how many, so they knew not to overreact (and build a massive deterrent to an overstated threat), or under-react (and g…

Isn't there some kind of game theory which takes irrational/drunken actors into account?

Re: The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

#108

Post by teyc »

arethuza wrote: post #104
teyc wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm only trying to figure how Chalabi managed to fool the entire US intelligence machinery into invading Iraq, and the only logical conclusion is he couldn't. Facts were being created by the hawks and these people decides on who gets access to the President.

As far as I am aware, the decision making process started with a desire to invade Iraq and then once it was decided to do this any evidence that could justify this decision was collected and circulated (even if it came from someone who was known to be delusional). Even worse, the UK government knew that there weren't good reasons to invade Iraq, but went along with it simply to keep in with the United States.

I didn't think GWB himself was a neocon, although he was surrounded by a few.

Re: The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

#109

Post by littlebird »

count wrote: post #76
frisco wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I've always wondered about was what the President's clearance consists of. Are there things he doesn't have access to? Does he know he doesn't have access? Can he see a list of every secret program, but perhaps not get details? Does he have totally unfettered access to everything the US does? Edit: the corollary is, "how many people have access to everything?" or alternatively, "if the president doesn't, do…

Not being the President, this is purely speculation, but I would guess: There are many things the President probably does not have unfettered access to. There are many, many, many trainings and shit you go through that reinforce that seniority and superiority do not in themselves constitute the 'need to know' for classified information. There should NOT be someone who has access to everything, as the entire point of…

There exist a number of "super users," I believe their role is to minimize redundancy of effort. Even if someone had access to everything, the amount of data generated far exceeds what one person can handle.

Re: The mental gymnastics involved in having a high security clearance.

#110

Post by littlebird »

Palomides wrote: post #4

for those interested in US governmental secrecy stuff, http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/ is a very interesting blog/newsletter

For a more nuts and bolts view of security requirements and procedures, the NISPOM is publicly available http://www.dss.mil/isp/fac_clear/download_nispom.html
Post reply on HN