7 ms·

Hillary Has an NSA Problem

21 points by remarkEon 11y ago

snowwrestler 11y ago
This is an obvious hit piece that adds nothing to what has already been reported by more reliable news sources.
justinlardinois 11y ago
> “What did she not want put on a government system, where security people might see it?” the former NSA official asked, adding, “I wonder now, and I sure wish I’d asked about it back in 2009.” Hold on. She wanted a custom, NSA-built Blackberry so she could check her personal email...and this former NSA official thinks her aversion to checking her personal email on a desktop was for privacy reasons? Give me a break. My understanding is that when Clinton's tenure began as Secretary of State, the department (and most of the federal government) didn't have developed bring-your-own-device policies, and she specifically requested the NSA provide her a secure device so she could comply with security requirements. As snowwrestler says, this is a hit piece. It looks more and more to me like Clinton was doing her best to work with ambiguous and incomplete security policies, and the NSA denied her request for hardware that would somewhat ameliorate the problem. This revelation about the Blackberry request reads as more of a vindication of Clinton than anything else (and adds more support to the idea that what led to the email scandal wasn't really her fault), but this article is somehow twisting it into an attack. Might be worth adding that I've never heard of this news outlet.
- woodman 11y ago
  > ...aversion to checking her personal email on a desktop... Your point depends on Clinton having an understand of the way an NSA-berry works, how the traffic is routed, and what the auditing policies are; then, using that the same level of understanding for the office computer to weigh the privacy of one over the other. That seems pretty unlikely, and I can easily imagine that she'd feel more in control of a phone in her pocket than a PC under her desk. > ...so she could comply with security requirements. One does not setup a private mail server, containing classified material, if one is interested in complying with security requirements. > ...ambiguous and incomplete security policies... There is nothing ambiguous about classified material, and the rules for handling are extremely simple: whatever contains the material must be rated greater than or equal to the classification level of the material. The policy is so comprehensive that it spans tactical radio key loaders to shielded government facilities.
  - justinlardinois 11y ago
    >> ...aversion to checking her personal email on a desktop... > Your point depends on Clinton having an understand of the way an NSA-berry works, how the traffic is routed, and what the auditing policies are; then, using that the same level of understanding for the office computer to weigh the privacy of one over the other. That seems pretty unlikely, and I can easily imagine that she'd feel more in control of a phone in her pocket than a PC under her desk. I think you're reading into this too much. Any reasonably intelligent person should assume that a government device provided for government work should be under some kind of surveillance, regardless of what type of device it is. I doubt she knew the difference in how the desktop versus the phone would be monitored, but it doesn't matter. The point I was making is that a preference for reading email on a phone, rather than a desktop computer, is all that's really at play here. >> ...so she could comply with security requirements. > One does not setup a private mail server, containing classified material, if one is interested in complying with security requirements. The security requirements I was referring to were that you couldn't bring your personal phone into secure facilities. But you read my whole comment, so you know that. >> ...ambiguous and incomplete security policies... > There is nothing ambiguous about classified material, and the rules for handling are extremely simple: whatever contains the material must be rated greater than or equal to the classification level of the material. The policy is so comprehensive that it spans tactical radio key loaders to shielded government facilities. I wasn't referring to information classification, I was referring to bring-your-own-device policies, which were non-existent or underdeveloped at the time. But you read my whole comment, so you know that.
    - woodman 11y ago
      > The point I was making is that a preference for reading email on a phone... I agree with that point - that personal preference over standard operating procedures is the likely motivator, but your pointing to the origin of the phone as some kind of evidence of logical exclusivity doesn't hold up. > The security requirements I was referring to were that you couldn't bring your personal phone into secure facilities. So your method of determining an individual's motives in an environment of uncertainty begins with "Throw out everything we know for a fact about this person..."? > I wasn't referring to information classification, I was referring to bring-your-own-device policies, which were non-existent or underdeveloped at the time. BYOD policies did exist and were well developed at the time, they were very simple: "Don't." That was made pretty clear in the article, so I'm not sure how you don't know that, unless you are confusing "underdeveloped" with "not what I want".
nkurz 11y ago
Ms. Clinton only checked her personal email on her Blackberry: she did not want to sit down at a computer terminal. As a result, the NSA informed Secretary Clinton in early 2009 that they could not help her. When Team Clinton kept pressing the point, “We were politely told to shut up and color” by IAD, explained the state security official. I wasn't familiar with the phrase "shut up and color". It seems to be a common Air Force phrase used to remind subordinates of their role: shut up and color References the popular kindergarten past-time involving line art and various multicolored crayons, also known as "coloring". coloring often results in an all-consuming, zombie-like preoccupation of the participant with the activity at hand and a subsequent obliviousness to the rest of the world as he/she bravely endeavors to stay inside the lines. 1.) <direct command; imperative> a streamlined and highly economical verbal jab that efficiently informs the receiving end to—in the following order—(a) step the fuck off, (b) shut the hell up and (c) mind their own goddamn business without actually having to use any profanity oneself. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shut+up+and+color http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shut+up+and+c... Surprisingly, it can also be used with positive connotation: Maybe by reintroducing "shut up and color" I will catch some individuals off guard. But my intent is not to offend, but encourage people to reevaluate themselves as leaders and followers and as Airmen. Airmen are only human, so each of us has had our gripes at one time or another. But, there is a time and place to voice your concerns and I believe when you are surrounded by great leadership they will embrace those concerns. However before you make your concerns known, assess what is really wrong - that's where every individual can reevaluate himself. Is it the system or is it you? Instead of asking "why," listen and understand, then do something to fix the situation. If you're a leader, listening and following through on the situation to make things better for your Airmen is key. In my opinion, "shut up and color," is meant to help us understand, conform and act the way we should when we are at work, representing the world's greatest air force. Let me be clear, Airmen at all levels need to make sure that the message, "shut up and color" is not misinterpreted or disrespectful to any Airmen. I convey this message as motivation and a challenge: everyone needs to lead by example. You don't have to agree with me. However, I hope you hear what I said and give yourself a gut check. I fulfill my duties and role as an Airman. When the Air Force requires some sacrifice, I'm ready to shut up and color! Are you? http://www.lajes.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123401376 http://www.lajes.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123401376

21 points by remarkEon 11y ago

This is an obvious hit piece that adds nothing to what has already been reported by more reliable news sources.

> “What did she not want put on a government system, where security people might see it?” the former NSA official asked, adding, “I wonder now, and I sure wish I’d asked about it back in 2009.” Hold on. She wanted a custom, NSA-built Blackberry so she could check her personal email...and this former NSA official thinks her aversion to checking her personal email on a desktop was for privacy reasons? Give me a break. My understanding is that when Clinton's tenure began as Secretary of State, the department (and most of the federal government) didn't have developed bring-your-own-device policies, and she specifically requested the NSA provide her a secure device so she could comply with security requirements. As snowwrestler says, this is a hit piece. It looks more and more to me like Clinton was doing her best to work with ambiguous and incomplete security policies, and the NSA denied her request for hardware that would somewhat ameliorate the problem. This revelation about the Blackberry request reads as more of a vindication of Clinton than anything else (and adds more support to the idea that what led to the email scandal wasn't really her fault), but this article is somehow twisting it into an attack. Might be worth adding that I've never heard of this news outlet.

woodman 11y ago
> ...aversion to checking her personal email on a desktop... Your point depends on Clinton having an understand of the way an NSA-berry works, how the traffic is routed, and what the auditing policies are; then, using that the same level of understanding for the office computer to weigh the privacy of one over the other. That seems pretty unlikely, and I can easily imagine that she'd feel more in control of a phone in her pocket than a PC under her desk. > ...so she could comply with security requirements. One does not setup a private mail server, containing classified material, if one is interested in complying with security requirements. > ...ambiguous and incomplete security policies... There is nothing ambiguous about classified material, and the rules for handling are extremely simple: whatever contains the material must be rated greater than or equal to the classification level of the material. The policy is so comprehensive that it spans tactical radio key loaders to shielded government facilities.
- justinlardinois 11y ago
  >> ...aversion to checking her personal email on a desktop... > Your point depends on Clinton having an understand of the way an NSA-berry works, how the traffic is routed, and what the auditing policies are; then, using that the same level of understanding for the office computer to weigh the privacy of one over the other. That seems pretty unlikely, and I can easily imagine that she'd feel more in control of a phone in her pocket than a PC under her desk. I think you're reading into this too much. Any reasonably intelligent person should assume that a government device provided for government work should be under some kind of surveillance, regardless of what type of device it is. I doubt she knew the difference in how the desktop versus the phone would be monitored, but it doesn't matter. The point I was making is that a preference for reading email on a phone, rather than a desktop computer, is all that's really at play here. >> ...so she could comply with security requirements. > One does not setup a private mail server, containing classified material, if one is interested in complying with security requirements. The security requirements I was referring to were that you couldn't bring your personal phone into secure facilities. But you read my whole comment, so you know that. >> ...ambiguous and incomplete security policies... > There is nothing ambiguous about classified material, and the rules for handling are extremely simple: whatever contains the material must be rated greater than or equal to the classification level of the material. The policy is so comprehensive that it spans tactical radio key loaders to shielded government facilities. I wasn't referring to information classification, I was referring to bring-your-own-device policies, which were non-existent or underdeveloped at the time. But you read my whole comment, so you know that.
  - woodman 11y ago
    > The point I was making is that a preference for reading email on a phone... I agree with that point - that personal preference over standard operating procedures is the likely motivator, but your pointing to the origin of the phone as some kind of evidence of logical exclusivity doesn't hold up. > The security requirements I was referring to were that you couldn't bring your personal phone into secure facilities. So your method of determining an individual's motives in an environment of uncertainty begins with "Throw out everything we know for a fact about this person..."? > I wasn't referring to information classification, I was referring to bring-your-own-device policies, which were non-existent or underdeveloped at the time. BYOD policies did exist and were well developed at the time, they were very simple: "Don't." That was made pretty clear in the article, so I'm not sure how you don't know that, unless you are confusing "underdeveloped" with "not what I want".

nkurz 11y ago

Ms. Clinton only checked her personal email on her Blackberry: she did not want to sit down at a computer terminal. As a result, the NSA informed Secretary Clinton in early 2009 that they could not help her. When Team Clinton kept pressing the point, “We were politely told to shut up and color” by IAD, explained the state security official. I wasn't familiar with the phrase "shut up and color". It seems to be a common Air Force phrase used to remind subordinates of their role: shut up and color References the popular kindergarten past-time involving line art and various multicolored crayons, also known as "coloring". coloring often results in an all-consuming, zombie-like preoccupation of the participant with the activity at hand and a subsequent obliviousness to the rest of the world as he/she bravely endeavors to stay inside the lines. 1.) <direct command; imperative> a streamlined and highly economical verbal jab that efficiently informs the receiving end to—in the following order—(a) step the fuck off, (b) shut the hell up and (c) mind their own goddamn business without actually having to use any profanity oneself. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shut+up+and+color http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shut+up+and+c... Surprisingly, it can also be used with positive connotation: Maybe by reintroducing "shut up and color" I will catch some individuals off guard. But my intent is not to offend, but encourage people to reevaluate themselves as leaders and followers and as Airmen. Airmen are only human, so each of us has had our gripes at one time or another. But, there is a time and place to voice your concerns and I believe when you are surrounded by great leadership they will embrace those concerns. However before you make your concerns known, assess what is really wrong - that's where every individual can reevaluate himself. Is it the system or is it you? Instead of asking "why," listen and understand, then do something to fix the situation. If you're a leader, listening and following through on the situation to make things better for your Airmen is key. In my opinion, "shut up and color," is meant to help us understand, conform and act the way we should when we are at work, representing the world's greatest air force. Let me be clear, Airmen at all levels need to make sure that the message, "shut up and color" is not misinterpreted or disrespectful to any Airmen. I convey this message as motivation and a challenge: everyone needs to lead by example. You don't have to agree with me. However, I hope you hear what I said and give yourself a gut check. I fulfill my duties and role as an Airman. When the Air Force requires some sacrifice, I'm ready to shut up and color! Are you? http://www.lajes.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123401376 http://www.lajes.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123401376