Started By
Message

re: Reality Winner shows the NSA has learned nothing from Edward Snowden

Posted on 6/6/17 at 2:01 pm to
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
117547 posts
Posted on 6/6/17 at 2:01 pm to
If only her parents had left out the 'i'. She would have had a nice life selling houses.
Posted by AUstar
Member since Dec 2012
19612 posts
Posted on 6/6/17 at 3:48 pm to
NSA did change a lot of policies after the Snowden affair. Gen. Alexander (former director of NSA) changed rules about contractors (at least IT people, which Snowden was). He made it so any IT person who accessed classified machines has to have another person sign off whenever the machine is accessed for maintenance. Not only sign off, but the other person stands over their shoulder and watches. This helps protect against the "thumb drive" threat, where one guy takes a thumb drive and downloads gigabytes of classified documents (as Snowden did).

However, this Reality woman was able to print out a top-secret document from her desk in Georgia. Even worse, she did not have authorization to even view this information, yet somehow managed to print it out anyway.

Just because you have a top-secret clearance doesn't give you access to all top-secret information. It seems our government is having a hard time compartmentalizing this stuff. TS/SCI doesn't mean what it used to. Some stuff appears to no longer be "Specially Compartmented Information."

In the case of the document Winner released, it was labeled:

quote:

TOP SECRET/SI/ORCON/REL to USA, FVEY/FISA


This means:

Top-Secret -- Highest general classification. If you have a TS clearance you can view the document AS LONG as your clearance matches the other markings, which follow.

SI = Special Intelligence, which means it contains communications intercepts (sometimes called COMINT). SI is a "compartment" which you must be cleared for and usually means that your job description must give you the "need to know" before you're allowed to access it. Typically people at NSA would be cleared for SI, whereas someone at CIA might not (depending on their job description). Another such compartment would be HCS (HUMINT) which is "human intelligence" (i.e. spies on the ground). People at CIA would generally be cleared for HUMINT, whereas people at NSA would not because the NSA is not a HUMINT organization. This is a generalization, but you get the idea. My point here is that even if you have a TS clearance, you cannot access compartmented information unless you have clearance for that compartment.

ORCON -- Originator Controlled. This means the originating agency who did the collection has strict control over the information. It cannot be disseminated without their approval.

REL to USA, FVEY -- This means the information was cleared to be shared with our closest "Five Eyes" allies. They include Britain, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

FISA -- This means the FISA court. This probably means that the document contains information intercepted under a FISA warrant.
Posted by SabiDojo
Open to any suggestions.
Member since Nov 2010
84434 posts
Posted on 6/6/17 at 3:49 pm to
I'm surprised they hire analysts that are as young as she is. People in their early and mid-20's are still rather idealistic and less mature/responsible.
Posted by Sentrius
Fort Rozz
Member since Jun 2011
64757 posts
Posted on 6/6/17 at 3:55 pm to
quote:

People in their early and mid-20's are still rather idealistic and less mature/responsible.



It just makes you think that she literally pissed away a bright future for her hatred against Trump or whatever leftist ideal she did it for. A politician, no matter how much you hate him, is not worth losing your freedom over, your pension over and losing the ability to be around family and friends over.

She's only 25 and this shite is going to be following her well into her 40s even if she gets out of prison in her late 30s. That's a good chunk of her lifespan.
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 6/6/17 at 4:26 pm to
quote:

These three premises seem to be in tension and I'm not sure how they can all simultaneously be true: 1. Contract labor is cheaper for the government than direct employment 2. Contractors receive better compensation than they do as direct employees 3. Contractor companies make enough profits to sustain managers, executives, shareholders, etc

They aren't in tension at all.

Federal Benefits are much more lavish than typical contract companies.
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 4Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram