4 ms·

I think this is "cheaper" like - its cheaper to to have supply chains for critical medical gear in China. Makes for a great target for espionage on military ta

by dv_dt 7y ago

I think this is "cheaper" like - its cheaper to to have supply chains for critical medical gear in China. Makes for a great target for espionage on military tactics and capabilities for one risk.

parsimo2010 7y ago
I won't say that they offer perfect security, but these are military contractors, not part-timers from a temp agency. They are mostly ex-military (you can't get trained Hornet drivers anywhere else except for a few civilian test pilots), still have to maintain their security clearances, and are subject to security audits. They probably have vulnerabilities but I don't think a training contractor is as juicy of a target as you might think. They only maintain information on the capabilities of the enemies they are supposed to simulate- aggressor units don't have information on the blue air capabilities. It not useless information, but it mostly doesn't make sense for Russia/China to spend their effort finding out what the US thinks Russia/China is capable of. They already have a pretty good idea.
- hutzlibu 7y ago
  " but it mostly doesn't make sense for Russia/China to spend their effort finding out what the US thinks Russia/China is capable of" What? Quite the opposite, it is totally valuable information, if you know, what your enemy thinks you can do. Because then you can adjust, to surprise him in real combat. Or you find out that they over- or underestimate you in a certain area, which is very valuable tactical information as well. So they surely are a target for foreign intelligence agencies, but I am pretty sure they know that.
- noir_lord 7y ago
  > ‘... spies?' I thought we were chums with the Low King!’ > 'Of course we are,’ said Vetinari. ‘And the more we know about each other, the friendlier we shall remain. We’d hardly bother to spy on our enemies. What would be the point?’ - Lord Vetinari - Thud (Sir Terry Pratchett)
- na85 7y ago
  >still have to maintain their security clearances >They probably have vulnerabilities but I don't think a training contractor is as juicy of a target as you might think ... It not useless information, but it mostly doesn't make sense for Russia/China to spend their effort finding out what the US thinks Russia/China is capable of. They already have a pretty good idea. This is contradictory. Classified information is, by definition, that which could cause harm to the national interest if disclosed. Either their information is valuable or it isn't.
  - mehrdadn 7y ago
    From what I've read I'm pretty sure not everyone who has to maintain a clearance deals with actually sensitive information.
- foota 7y ago
  Technically, it's not what the US thinks they're capable of, but rather what the contractors the US hires think China/Russia are capable of. The US may know that that China/Russia's actual combat abilities are greater than the contractors do.
icarus_camp 7y ago
It's a pro and con type of thing. For example you can go out and hire a former Soviet MIG driver and get him to drive the the Hornet just like he say taught the Iranians to drive their MIGs (limiting the performance of the Hornet to match that of the older aircraft, etc). For the military to directly hire a foreign national who served in a different military is a ton of paperwork. It's much easier to have the contractor do it. There obviously is a security risk, but as long as you compartmentalize the risk it's okay. It's also the issue of keeping said Soviet MIG driver busy, in that maybe you have 6 months of work for him a year. Other six months of the year he can't exactly hang around the Pentagon and help with reports since as you mention, it's a security risk. The contractor can keep him working by say doing 6 months a year of training with the American military, 3 months of training with the Canadians, 2 months with the Swedish, etc. There are proven models for minimizing risk. The intel agencies often like to hire foreign nations because they have local expertise with regard to their home country, but the CIA can't exactly just make a Chinese national a W-2 employee and let them run around Langley.
tptacek 7y ago
Most intelligence about US military capabilities is managed by private companies. Most of the people who provide security to protect US military intelligence work for private companies.

by dv_dt 7y ago

I think this is "cheaper" like - its cheaper to to have supply chains for critical medical gear in China. Makes for a great target for espionage on military tactics and capabilities for one risk.

parsimo2010 7y ago

I won't say that they offer perfect security, but these are military contractors, not part-timers from a temp agency. They are mostly ex-military (you can't get trained Hornet drivers anywhere else except for a few civilian test pilots), still have to maintain their security clearances, and are subject to security audits. They probably have vulnerabilities but I don't think a training contractor is as juicy of a target as you might think. They only maintain information on the capabilities of the enemies they are supposed to simulate- aggressor units don't have information on the blue air capabilities. It not useless information, but it mostly doesn't make sense for Russia/China to spend their effort finding out what the US thinks Russia/China is capable of. They already have a pretty good idea.

hutzlibu 7y ago
" but it mostly doesn't make sense for Russia/China to spend their effort finding out what the US thinks Russia/China is capable of" What? Quite the opposite, it is totally valuable information, if you know, what your enemy thinks you can do. Because then you can adjust, to surprise him in real combat. Or you find out that they over- or underestimate you in a certain area, which is very valuable tactical information as well. So they surely are a target for foreign intelligence agencies, but I am pretty sure they know that.
noir_lord 7y ago
> ‘... spies?' I thought we were chums with the Low King!’ > 'Of course we are,’ said Vetinari. ‘And the more we know about each other, the friendlier we shall remain. We’d hardly bother to spy on our enemies. What would be the point?’ - Lord Vetinari - Thud (Sir Terry Pratchett)
na85 7y ago
>still have to maintain their security clearances >They probably have vulnerabilities but I don't think a training contractor is as juicy of a target as you might think ... It not useless information, but it mostly doesn't make sense for Russia/China to spend their effort finding out what the US thinks Russia/China is capable of. They already have a pretty good idea. This is contradictory. Classified information is, by definition, that which could cause harm to the national interest if disclosed. Either their information is valuable or it isn't.
- mehrdadn 7y ago
  From what I've read I'm pretty sure not everyone who has to maintain a clearance deals with actually sensitive information.
foota 7y ago
Technically, it's not what the US thinks they're capable of, but rather what the contractors the US hires think China/Russia are capable of. The US may know that that China/Russia's actual combat abilities are greater than the contractors do.

icarus_camp 7y ago

It's a pro and con type of thing. For example you can go out and hire a former Soviet MIG driver and get him to drive the the Hornet just like he say taught the Iranians to drive their MIGs (limiting the performance of the Hornet to match that of the older aircraft, etc). For the military to directly hire a foreign national who served in a different military is a ton of paperwork. It's much easier to have the contractor do it. There obviously is a security risk, but as long as you compartmentalize the risk it's okay. It's also the issue of keeping said Soviet MIG driver busy, in that maybe you have 6 months of work for him a year. Other six months of the year he can't exactly hang around the Pentagon and help with reports since as you mention, it's a security risk. The contractor can keep him working by say doing 6 months a year of training with the American military, 3 months of training with the Canadians, 2 months with the Swedish, etc. There are proven models for minimizing risk. The intel agencies often like to hire foreign nations because they have local expertise with regard to their home country, but the CIA can't exactly just make a Chinese national a W-2 employee and let them run around Langley.

tptacek 7y ago

Most intelligence about US military capabilities is managed by private companies. Most of the people who provide security to protect US military intelligence work for private companies.