6 ms·
The FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot (2014)
- nefitty 10y agoThree years seems like an unreasonable timespan. They might end up with people who have little to no social skills with that kind of policy. I don't mean to say that not abstaining for that length of time is abnormal, but young people who are the most adept and skilled with new technologies are bound to find themselves in a situation where they take a hit. I wonder if the drug tests after that are regularly scheduled or if they take you at your word once you're hired.
- strictnein 10y agoThree years is kind of crazy. NSA, CIA, and other agencies it's one year. FBI should have the easiest time finding hackers. Unlike the CIA and NSA, they have offices in almost every major city, but they don't seem to take advantage of that at all. They don't event list any tech/cyber/whatever roles here: https://apply.fbijobs.gov/ https://apply.fbijobs.gov/
- drawnwren 10y agoFalse. NSA is definitely 10 years [1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Scope_Background_Investigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Scope_Background_Invest...
- badlucklottery 10y agoYou can still pass your investigation if you've done drugs in the last 10 years but you do have to disclose it and sign a form that states you won't do it again or associate with anyone who does while you have a clearance (edit: or at least that's how it was 10 years ago). The purpose of clearance investigations isn't to dig up dirt in order to hurt you you, it's to find out what dirt foreign intel services can dig up on you in order to hurt/blackmail you.
- kristofferR 10y ago> or associate with anyone who does No wonder they're having problems finding candidates. Hackers are probably way more likely to use certain drugs like weed, MDMA and psychedelics than the general population, due to their intellectual curiosity and intelligence levels (which I assume are significantly higher than the average). Do they really force applicants to disassociate with their friends and family, like in Scientology, or is it just a rule they only care really about in the most serious cases (if friends are dealers or have drug problems etc)?
- skafjvhs 10y agoWell, they make everyone sign the papers, and they frequently polygraph. It's risky to get a clearance if you are breaking the rules. You'd have to keep your story straight, and have the ability to defeat test anxiety. Maybe that's a good process if you are trying to find a good spy. Not very good for recruiting a hacker. I hear they bend the rules for extraordinary candidates - maybe that applies to all hackers these days.
- AstralStorm 10y agoUsing a broken lie detection methodology? Is that even legal? Polygraph evidence is not admissible in US courts anymore.
- skafjvhs 10y agoThe Employee Polygraph Protection Act prevents US employers from testing their employees. The government is exempt.
- badlucklottery 10y ago>Do they really force applicants to disassociate with their friends and family Anecdotal but it wasn't enforced at all. I suspect it was a CYA measure for firing someone with undesirable connections but no illegal activities.
- 10y ago
- strictnein 10y agoEhh... no, that's how far back they look, but only within the last year is sometimes a disqualifier. I can tell you that they will overlook even fairly recent usage sometimes. CIA: "To be considered suitable for Agency employment, applicants must generally not have used illegal drugs or misused prescription drugs within the last 12 months." NSA: "Recent and/or frequent use of illegal drugs, including marijuana even in states whose laws permit its recreational or medical use, could raise a security concern, and may be disqualifying"
- drawnwren 10y agoThey are most likely randomly administered to all employees along with a regularly scheduled polygraph. That's the DoD's model.
- badlucklottery 10y ago>I wonder if the drug tests after that are regularly scheduled or if they take you at your word once you're hired. If the FBI anything like the DOE it's random for the duration you have a clearance. Random polygraphs too which are much, much worse.
- corobo 10y agoSo scrolling through this thread so far we have - No smoking pot in 3 years - Random drug tests - Random lie detector tests - Not the best pay in the world - Lousy career prospects - Working with others who they admit aren't the most technical in the world Yeah can't see why they're having trouble hiring
- raverbashing 10y agoThey probably rely on a sense of patriotism/duty/exclusivity to make this work for other "on the line" departments
- flukus 10y agoI guess you can throw ridiculous dress code in too?
- MichaelBurge 10y agoNow that it's been legalized in Oregon, there are marijuana stores all over. But before that, I don't even know where'd you'd get the stuff. Occasionally when I'd ride a train to work at 4 AM, somebody would come up and try to buy it from me; so I guess I look like a drug dealer. In states where it's illegal, do you just wander the streets at night asking people for pot, and hope it's not laced with rat poison? I've literally never seen actual marijuana in real life before, even in a state where it's legal. So I'm not sure I buy this argument that you can't go 3 years without smoking the stuff.
- flukus 10y agoIt's about knowing the right people, you have to know someone, or know someone that knows someone. Ideally that someone is near the end of the supply chain. Have you asked around your circle of friends? Or asked them to ask around for you? You probably aren't too many hops away from a supplier.
- mikestew 10y agoIn states where it's illegal, do you just wander the streets at night asking people for pot, and hope it's not laced with rat poison? First off, it is the rare businessperson who sees harming their customer as the road to success. But such antics do occasionally happen, so I won't belabor it. Second, you live in Oregon? Unless you live with a restrictive religious sect, I guarantee at least one of your friends gets high. Figure out who it is, ask them. I'm sure Portland, like Seattle, has a park or two; put your hoodie on and go for a walk. Or just ask the internet these days. All moot for you now, as you swing by the store on the way home.
- kbd 10y agoStupid requirements lead to poor hiring. It's the government's own fault. I always wonder how much of their workforce a company like Google would have to fire if they drug tested.
- mwfunk 10y agoHonestly, with all the big tech companies in SV that would be anywhere from 20-30% IME. And many of them would be among the best people at those companies. I can't imagine a better way to needlessly drive away good people than to have a zero-tolerance policy for weed. It's crazy that any employer still cares about this, as long as people are getting their work done and aren't using it on the job.
- kilroy123 10y agoThis is why very few companies care.
- vacri 10y agoAn agency whose reason for existing is enforcing the law can't really be expected to flout the law with its own personnel. It's not like the FBI itself legislated against marijuana.
- kmonsen 10y agoThey don't really have to do drug tests though. Should they for example install monitoring in employees cars to make sure they never speed?
- vacri 10y agoI don't mean to defend the FBI's activites, I just mean to note that if your reason for being is "opposing X", then it's reasonable that you check your employees for X. The FBI opposes drugs big time. It doesn't care about people speeding in cars.
- 10y ago
- kmonsen 10y agoSo even the article says the main reason they can't hire good hackers is that the can't offer reasonable compensation, long term career prospects etc. But het, much easier to blame those hackers for smoking pot. This is just a stupid excuse for why he is not doing his job effectively.
- cassy500 10y agoi strongly recommend globalhackteam34@gmail.com for all your hacking problems, last year he helped me spy on my husband when he was cheating of me, he served as a personal investigator to me by helping me spy on my husband's phone activities like facebook, email, whatsapp, calls, skype and others. am sure someone out there is looking for how to solve his relationship problems, contact him and am sure he will help you too. you can also call or text their number +19542719191
- mejiacourtney39 10y agoHello im wondering if u could help me find things out
- trlane040 10y agoDo contact hyperhacktive1@gmail.com i assure you hes competent and reliable Regards
- trlane040 10y agohyperhacktive1 @gmail .com is a professional hacker that specializes in exposing cheating spouse,and every other hacking related issues. he helps catch cheating spouse by hacking their communications like call, Facebook, text, emails, Skype and many more. i have used this service before and he did a very good job, he gave me every proof i needed to know that my fiancee was cheating. You can contact him on his email hyperhacktive1 @gmail .com to help you catch your cheating spouse, or for any other hacking related problems, he will definitely help you, he has helped a lot of people, contact him and figure out your relationship status. i wish you the best too.
- 10y ago
- siscia 10y agoCould we update the title to reflect that this is an old article?
- mjevans 10y agoHow about because those whom are skilled and ethical view a lot of the work that the government would use them for to be unethical and against the principles upon which their country is founded? What if they feel that someone like Edward Snowden is a true patriot, for standing up and doing the correct thing in the most viable way offered to him? Or maybe, after a lifetime of experiencing government bureaucracy in schools, they've seen how broken things can get there, and can't even begin to imagine how bad things can be in the areas with insufficient light to burn away the worst offenders?
- draw_down 10y agoEasier to blame the pot, I think.
- duncan_bayne 10y agoThe same FBI that fights the War on Drugs and the War on Whistle-blowers so violently? The FBI that was behind COINTELPRO (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO)? The FBI that recommended against prosecution of Clinton despite finding that she was negligent in her handling of classified information? Cry me a river.
- iamdave 10y agoI'm going to agree with you re: Whistleblowers & COINTELPRO, but was Clinton criminally negligent or just "Best practices were not adhered to" negligent? My impression from Comey's statements are the latter. Asking this genuinely, since I didn't read far into the story beyond said statements.
- xenadu02 10y agoThe email thing is just a conservative smoke smear. Reading the FBI investigation files makes that extremely clear... and obvious why she wasn't charged: no crime was committed. She even went so far as to avoid Colin Powel's advice on how to hide her emails from FOIA requests.
- douche 10y agoUsing BleachBit on servers, smashing devices with hammers to destroy hard drives, and straight up losing dozens of devices with classified information on them? At best its got some real subpar optics, and even being charitable and assuming no ill intent, it looks bumbling and incompetent.
- iamdave 10y agoAt best its got some real subpar optics, and even being charitable and assuming no ill intent, it looks bumbling and incompetent. Okay. But are those things criminal? The parent of this chain mentioned the FBI recommending against prosecution, implying criminal acts occurred, so I think this posit is non-ignorable.
- raverbashing 10y ago(2014) I even think it was posted at that time (or maybe a similar article) Well, can't say I'm sorry for them.
- caub 10y agogood hackers don't smoke
- AlwaysBCoding 10y agogreat hackers do though
- kctess5 10y agoWhat leads you to believe this? Do you also think that good hackers don't drink?
- caub 10y agothe loss of neurons that goes with smoking
- jrockway 10y agoDoes the FBI's salary compare favorably with what people get at big software companies? I'm guessing that's the real problem. Going deeper, what's the career progression like at the FBI? Do you work your way up to being a higher-titled software engineer, or do you have to transition into a different role in order to get paid more? Guess what, that's another problem the private sector has solved. How much did we pay for that joint strike fighter? That's how much reasonable cybersecurity is going to cost.
- fabrixxm 10y agoI don't ever thought that FBI's agents had so much problems finding people because they are all smoking so much pot...
- Kopion 10y agoI applied to the FBI, made it all the way through the hiring process and then failed the polygraph portion. It was 100% a false positive... Maybe they should look at utilizing a method other than the polygraph for assessing deception.
- DrStalker 10y agoI thought polygraphs were so well discredited by now that no-one used them; is the FBI still screening with them? What sort of questions are they asking and disqualifying you on?
- Kopion 10y agoThey are largely discredited, especially for pre-employment screenings. The polygraph exam is the last phase in the Special Agent hiring process, which can take up to a couple of years to complete. Several federal agencies still use it. I can't discuss what is asked, but you can walk out of the exam and know whether or not you told the truth - there is no ambiguity about the answers you give. That is why I am 100% certain it was a false positive.
- voidz 10y ago"When you're high, you can do everything you normally do just as well — you just realize that it's not worth the fucking effort. There is a difference.” ― Bill Hicks
- rdtsc 10y agoI never smoked pot, but I don't know what it would take to apply to work for FBI. Having dealt with the government as a customer, no thank you. Endless sea of red tape, outdated tools and practices, stupid requirements, paper security (I call that security driven by a checklist on a form. A system is deemed secure if it passes all those checks. Which often make no difference or makes things even worse when it comes to actual security).
- emidln 10y agoAre they still asking you if you've ever knowingly accessed a network that you didn't have permission to? And is a 'yes' still an automatic disqualification? Them: So we'd like your skills as a hacker, but one last thing. Have you ever actually hacked something? (wink, wink) You: Ye... Them: (winking intensifies) You: err....no. Definitely never done that. That would be illegal. Them: Excellent. Also, you never smoked dope right? You: Not the devil's weed! Why I'd never! Them: Right! Welcome to the team!
- gozur88 10y agoHmmm. When I went to get a security clearance they said "When it comes to pot we don't care what you did in the past as long as 1) you don't lie about it and 2) you stop when you're working for us." If the FBI is hurting for people they can relax it at least that far.
- morrbo 10y agoThis old fucking chestnut again. I am a pentester for a living, and have been for 10 odd years. No, the answer is not because they smoke pot. The answer is because governments across the world pay 30% of going corporate rates, and tend to be shitty environments filled with politics and work which most people of that persuasion might not agree with.
- dalke 10y agoWhat's worse is the article even says pot smoking is not a major issue, with (emphasis mine): "... the federal government is having a hard time hiring cybersecurity experts, largely because many hackers can find more lucrative deals that don't involve working for the feds. But there's another wrinkle: the FBI now says that its drug-testing policies are keeping experts off the payroll."
- huffmsa 10y agoCIA doesn't have these problems, for better or for worse. Thanks In-Q-Tel
- joesmo 10y agoThat's because the CIA doesn't hire without a criminal record. And smoking weed alone is probably not enough of a criminal record for the CIA.