Security Clearance - Page 4
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 33 of 33

Thread: Security Clearance

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Hog Jaw, Arkansas

    I had a SP in the AF and had a TS due to working in the Titan II missile silos back in '82-'83. I don't recall anyone talking to any of my family or friends. Later when I joined the Navy they did contact my Dad and a couple of other people.

    Then as a Gov't employee and contractor I don't think the contacted anyone.

    In '94 I applied for the Marshall Service and I think they even talked to the lunch lady at my preschool.

    I'm so Liberal that I work at the Bill and Hillary Clinton Regional Airport!

  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by mappow View Post
    I also throw this out there like flatulence in the wind.......Why would a E3 have access to millions of records and files listed TS or above? Pvt Manning, really???? Was this a set up like Fast & Furious gone bad? Need to know was always the standard of access. what has changed?
    I was given a TS/SCI before I graduated tech school and I was straight out of high school. Was 3rd week in for 9/11. It's all "AFSC/MOS/whatever the rest use" driven.

    Quote Originally Posted by fstroupe View Post
    I was hoping someone more familiar with the current system would comment. I had it explained to me in detail when Bradley Manning was first arrested, but don't remember all of the names and terminology.....and really don't feel like looking it up this morning to go in the detail I like to.

    This information may be dated, I was told this a few years ago. Classified documents up to TS are now available via an internet-styled system called SIPRNET, commonly known as "sipper". The current problems are due to that system, or at least it creates a new scenario. Back in the day, access to classified material was limited to what was available in the unit's library, besides whatever other measures were used to limit access by clearance level and need-to-know.....or lack thereof. Which means, even if someone was given access to material they weren't supposed to see, they were still limited by was was actually present in the library/file cabinet/safe/SKIF/etc.

    But with SIPRNET, if someone is accidentally given more access than they need or should have....and I'm sure that happens every day just like it did back in the day....they could very well have access to all of DoD's classifed information up to but not including TS codeword. Think about it.....picture an infantry battalion or brigade S-2. The S-2 NCO is also the security E-7 or E-8 infantry type who really would rather be leading a platoon/company of line-doggies rather than babysitting some lower-enlisted Intel Analysts and an MI lieutenant.

    So here you have PFC Bradley analyst with far too much unsupervised time on his hands and more access than he needs.....exploring SIPRNET. He discovers that not only is DoD's classified stuff located on it, but the State Department is also using the same net. (most of the information he gave to Wikileaks was from the State Department, which if I understand correctly no longer uses SIPRNET)

    Chew on it for a while. Think about times that you or someone you knew had access to stuff you weren't supposed to have access to. (for nearly a year my job included looking daily at some TS codeword stuff that I wasn't read on to....I was attached and not assigned, and it would have been a little of a PITA to read me no one ever did) Think about how much unsupervised time that Manning probably had, and he was passing the time by surfing around seeing what he could find on SIPRNET. Doesn't take a lot of imagination.....

    Just to add, if you weren't aware, Manning held on to this stuff for quite some time before he gave it to Wikileaks, over a year.

    SIPR holds up to Secret, TS networks hold up to TS, and TS/SCI networks hold up to TS/SCI. There are caveats granted above TS/SCI that need to be read in and only granted to those individuals upon additional "need to know".

  4. My last security clearance was held up because I was listed as 'deceased' in the comments section of a cancelled credit card on a credit report. I had cancelled a card and sent the company a 'cease and desist' letter asking them not to contact me anymore. They had been repeatedly calling me when I was working shift work and waking me up. The non-American who processed the letter I wrote incorrectly noted 'deceased' instead of 'desist.' It took a long time to get it squared away, but I was told it was a common error for non-native English speakers to make. No one doing the background check ever personally contacted anyone I had listed. They relied entirely on credit reports, and digital records.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts