3 ms·

Good point about headcount. So the federal government hires contractors to handle classified data even though doing so makes it structurally impossible to secu

Good point about headcount. So the federal government hires contractors to handle classified data even though doing so makes it structurally impossible to secure classified data. And they do so over and over again because they're caught between headcount restrictions and mission requirements. And because, as noted elsewhere in the thread, Booz is a massive proposal-writing machine, they're well positioned to receive these contracts.

munin 9y ago
> So the federal government hires contractors to handle classified data even though doing so makes it structurally impossible to secure classified data. Why? What's the difference between a contract employee and a government employee at this level? They all sign literally the same NDA, the same laws apply to both, the same polices apply to both. They both go through the same security screening process and they both pass the same (roughly) technical competency bar to do their jobs. You probably see more contractor fuckups just because there are more contractors. There are also many government staff fuckups (sure, Snowden was a contractor but every big spy prior was a civillian or military).
nova22033 9y ago
>hires contractors to handle classified data even though doing so makes it structurally impossible to secure classified data. Why? Ames and Hanssen were government employees.