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

What not to write on your security clearance form (1988)

milk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 568 posts

Re: What not to write on your security clearance form (1988)

#61

Post by emn13 »

ckastner wrote: post #18

It's a great story, but didn't the author confess to a felony by publishing it? He lied on an official document, even if directed to do so by the person across him. I know this is pedantic, but that's exactly what I would expect from a security clearance vetting process.

I kind of _hope_ any statutes of limitations would have expired 35 years ago for events then 45 years ago. There's not much point in retaining liability for events that long ago; it's not like you'll ever catch the "crooks", nor likely have the ability to really judge events reasonably anymore by that time.

'course, with the general urge to be "tough on crime" and the inevitable occasional horror-story of truly heinous behavior discovered many decades later there probably isn't a lot of political will to support reasonable statutes of limitations, so I wouldn't be surprised if some of this stuff never expires.

Re: What not to write on your security clearance form (1988)

#62

Post by ckastner »

gnfargbl wrote: post #59
ckastner wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a case of a mistaken identity, the FBI found exactly the person they were looking for. It just turned out that said person wasn't a threat, after all. I'd say determining that is exactly the point of an investigation. That fact that it ended well doesn't change the fact that the process happened, and was triggered by said person.

It is true that the FBI found the person they were looking for, and that person was the terminus of their investigation. It is not true that the article author was investigated by the FBI . He was nothing more than a MacGuffin in the overall plot. In this specific case, the security officer made the correct decision in having him leave out this detail from the clearance form. Makes for a good story, though.

> It is true that the FBI found the person they were looking for, and that person was the terminus of their investigation. It is not true that the article author was investigated by the FBI; he wasn't

To me, these are the same, so I guess that's probably just my layman's view then.

Re: What not to write on your security clearance form (1988)

#63

Post by prmoustache »

xdfgh1112 wrote: post #7
Reubend wrote: post #4

> I learned by chance that putting certain provocative information on a security clearance form can greatly speed up the clearance process. But that is another story. Did he ever write about what that trick is?

https://yarchive.net/risks/mongrel.html Other poster posted the same link but is getting downvoted so might get overlooked.

I never understood that obsession and unwillingless to give up that broken concept of race/ethnicity in the USA.

Re: What not to write on your security clearance form (1988)

#64

Post by dwighttk »

bell-cot wrote: post #10

Sadly, the moral of the story seems to be that the 1943 FBI had loads of zealous (performative?) plods on staff, but ~zero law enforcement professionals. In '43, the US had plenty of highly competent professional cryptographers, who were quite experienced with current Japanese, German, Italian, British, etc. codes. Before an entire local FBI office spent even a day on this case (let alone 6 weeks), maybe they should…

>If it turned out to be a known code that (say) Canada used for low-security consular messages, that'd quickly narrow down or close the case.

It was made up by the two kids, so maybe they did that but it didn’t narrow down their case…

Re: What not to write on your security clearance form (1988)

#66

Post by FpUser »

ckastner wrote: post #58
FpUser wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe get a life and go catch actual spies. When the law makes innocent suffer fuck it.

Determining whether you're dealing with an actual spy or an innocent person is the entire point of such investigations.

The investigation was already concluded. Why should person suffer in the future when nothing wrong was done ?

Re: What not to write on your security clearance form (1988)

#67

Post by technothrasher »

"Here, fill it out again and don't mention that."

I had the exact same experience when applying for a clearance while I was in college, for the "have you taken illegal drugs" question. When I honestly answered yes, the interviewer got fidgety and then asked, "well do you take them now?" no. "Do you know any drug users?" We're on a college campus, what would you like me to say? "Well, are you friends with any of them?" Again, we're on a college campus. "Ok, well, we're just going to put down no for all of that."

Re: What not to write on your security clearance form (1988)

#68

Post by koliber »

bell-cot wrote: post #20
petesergeant wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Before an entire local FBI office spent even a day on this case (let alone 6 weeks), maybe they should have asked some of those professionals to look at the supposed "Japanese code key" page? That sounds far less exciting than scrambling to find a fifth columnist and potentially being hailed as a hero.

True. But most people, after they've been grown-ups for a while, figure out that "find the winning lotto ticket on the sidewalk and get rich" is not how life actually works. And with a war on...the FBI's kids, simpletons, day dreamers, and glory hounds should have been closely supervised by real grown-ups. Or transferred to lines of work better suited to their talents.

> most people, after they've been grown-ups for a while, figure out that "find the winning lotto ticket on the sidewalk and get rich"

True, but it's not completely bleak either. I once wanted to take out $40 from an ATM, and it gave me $60! I never told anyone and this is the first time I am sharing this. If a time comes to fill out a security clearance application, should this go in there?

Moral of the story: it takes money to make money. :)

Re: What not to write on your security clearance form (1988)

#69

Post by ianai »

chadd wrote: post #57
saalweachter wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've spent thirty years telling doctors I'm allergic to amoxicillin; I'm not sure if I am, but that's how my parents started every doctor visit when I was small so I carry on the tradition. I think I might have thrown up after taking it as a small child, but I have no recollection myself.

it's common to have childhood allergies to penicillin-class drugs which go away in adulthood; i had to have major surgery (as an adult) but had a similar childhood reaction. I was advised to do an allergy 'challenge test'. It turned out the allergy was either never really there or had gone away, which gives doctors more options when antibiotics are needed. It might be worth looking into.

But only “look into it” in a carefully supervised medical center. Don’t go rolling the dice on a severe allergic reaction to an antibiotic at home or outside of that supervision.

Re: What not to write on your security clearance form (1988)

#70

Post by stingraycharles »

technothrasher wrote: post #67

"Here, fill it out again and don't mention that." I had the exact same experience when applying for a clearance while I was in college, for the "have you taken illegal drugs" question. When I honestly answered yes, the interviewer got fidgety and then asked, "well do you take them now?" no. "Do you know any drug users?" We're on a college campus, what would you like me to say? "Well, are you friends with any of them?…

What would the ramifications be if they ever found out you lied? It’s an innocent lie, but still, I can imagine that lying on these types of forms could turn out badly.
Post reply on HN