2 ms·
They do seem to be idiots regarding their own internal security. That's the only explanation I can think of. For an organization that is on the forefront of off
by hackinthebochs 10y ago
They do seem to be idiots regarding their own internal security. That's the only explanation I can think of. For an organization that is on the forefront of offensive cyberwarefare, they could have been on the forefront of internal security as well. But they aren't.
- grandalf 10y agoI wonder if there is social pressure exerted by everyone to assume that someone who has made it through the vetting process is low risk... Imagine a group of clergy members, how likely is it that they'd want part of their group dynamic to be defending themselves against suspicion of atheism or doubt? It would seem that the identity aspect of feeling like one was on the defensive might create a psychological blind spot where everyone was pleased/relieved not to have to constantly prove his/her loyalty, thus establishing an implicit trustworthiness rather than an explicit one that would be psychologically challenging. Imagine showing up at work every day and someone reviewing your code with the suspicion that you might have intended to harm the business... regardless of one's level of competence this would be unpleasant, and humans avoid unpleasant things. I don't have security clearance of any expertise with it, just musing about it.
- hammock 10y agoCounterpoint: Every spy novel ever says "trust nobody;" that sentiment seems like a pretty engrained part of spook culture already.