11 ms·

Bellingcat themselves are... for lack of a better word, good. They do open source intelligence investigations into current world conflicts. They're pretty solid

Bellingcat themselves are... for lack of a better word, good. They do open source intelligence investigations into current world conflicts. They're pretty solid about transparency and showing how they arrived at various views. But their audience can be problematic. They tend to attract the crowd that screams "false flag" after every banal news event, so it's not surprising it'd be default spam suspect here, irrespective of the site itself. Also, I doubt this is a hnews concern, but for folks currently holding clearances just reading that story could put them in hot water.

mhh__ 5y ago
I've seen a lot of contrarianism here wrt Bellingcat - i.e. this is the only place outside Tankie forums where the benefit of doubt was given to the FSB/GRU rather than Bellingcat during the Skripal affair, regardless of whether you think that's appropriate or not, I think it should be categorically stated that just because hackernews is more civil than Reddit it is not subject to bias and groupthink: In particular I would like to challenge an undercurrent I've felt here since the day I started commenting, that just because hackernews is a good forum to discuss things properly that one's beliefs shouldn't be challenged or put on a pedestal by virtue of where they are said.
quercusa 5y ago
> for folks currently holding clearances just reading that story could put them in hot water. Can you elaborate on your last point - why?
- jasonwatkinspdx 5y ago
  It's part of how classification law works in the US DoD. Note: I do not hold a clearance, but I've had to sign affidavits for others, so I know a bit about how it works. Basically, the rules put the burden on the holder of a clearance to not expose themselves to information they shouldn't. If and when it does happen, you need to report it. The way the system works is of course horridly bureaucratic, but on the whole if you report things with honesty early it'll be handled without being a big deal. In any case, this means when you participate in forums/venues where open source intel and clearance holders are likely to interact, you'll see people giving that sort of warning as a courtesy, so that the clearance holders can just dodge the issue. It's sort of like putting a content warning in one of your early slides if you're going to discuss something that could be highly distressing to some people. Probably the most glaring example of this sort of content is the snowden archive. As a clearance holder you would not want to get noticed holding onto some of the documents that are in there, no matter their veracity.
  - quercusa 5y ago
    Very useful - thank you!
  - bradknowles 5y ago
    During Desert Shield/Desert Storm in the 1990s, when I was working for the Defense Information Systems Agency in the basement of the Pentagon, there were occasionally papers that were banned from the building. Usually just one particular day, but sometimes on multiple occasions. Just because something is printed in a newspaper doesn’t mean that the thing in question is unclassified. And if you have classified material in your possession and you don’t treat it properly (like locking it up in an appropriate safe when it’s going to be out of your hands, even for just a few minutes), then that can get you into some really serious trouble. If the publication in question contains a classified code word used in code word context and you don’t treat it appropriately, well then you’re probably done for. Feel free to try to guess which GURPS book from Steve Jackson Games that would be, but you would almost certainly be wrong.
    - jasonwatkinspdx 5y ago
      > Feel free to try to guess which GURPS book from Steve Jackson Games that would be, but you would almost certainly be wrong. I love this comment so much :P
lumpa 5y ago
> Also, I doubt this is a hnews concern, but for folks currently holding clearances just reading that story could put them in hot water. How would that work for folks holding clearances that, following one of several paths other than directly reading the article discussion (like reading some random user's comments page), get exposed to significant bits of the article? Come to think of it, how safe in general for folks with clearances is browsing HN, with its many discussions of military tech, intelligence topics, spycraft and security breaches news?
- aww_dang 5y ago
  Imagine dropping a few hundred hidden iframes of controversy on someone like that.
- salawat 5y ago
  As long as you report a breach, you're fine. Good luck figuring out who you're supposed to report to about that thing you aren't supposed to know about though. Thus is the Catch 22 of Quality Controlling. Information classification systems.
mcint 5y ago
Even though bellingcat reports resolution, re: reporting to NATO and removal of cards? I suppose trusting an outside org to have properly handled a NatSec breach would not be a part of NatSec procedures

mhh__ 5y ago

I've seen a lot of contrarianism here wrt Bellingcat - i.e. this is the only place outside Tankie forums where the benefit of doubt was given to the FSB/GRU rather than Bellingcat during the Skripal affair, regardless of whether you think that's appropriate or not, I think it should be categorically stated that just because hackernews is more civil than Reddit it is not subject to bias and groupthink: In particular I would like to challenge an undercurrent I've felt here since the day I started commenting, that just because hackernews is a good forum to discuss things properly that one's beliefs shouldn't be challenged or put on a pedestal by virtue of where they are said.

quercusa 5y ago

> for folks currently holding clearances just reading that story could put them in hot water. Can you elaborate on your last point - why?

jasonwatkinspdx 5y ago
It's part of how classification law works in the US DoD. Note: I do not hold a clearance, but I've had to sign affidavits for others, so I know a bit about how it works. Basically, the rules put the burden on the holder of a clearance to not expose themselves to information they shouldn't. If and when it does happen, you need to report it. The way the system works is of course horridly bureaucratic, but on the whole if you report things with honesty early it'll be handled without being a big deal. In any case, this means when you participate in forums/venues where open source intel and clearance holders are likely to interact, you'll see people giving that sort of warning as a courtesy, so that the clearance holders can just dodge the issue. It's sort of like putting a content warning in one of your early slides if you're going to discuss something that could be highly distressing to some people. Probably the most glaring example of this sort of content is the snowden archive. As a clearance holder you would not want to get noticed holding onto some of the documents that are in there, no matter their veracity.
- quercusa 5y ago
  Very useful - thank you!
- bradknowles 5y ago
  During Desert Shield/Desert Storm in the 1990s, when I was working for the Defense Information Systems Agency in the basement of the Pentagon, there were occasionally papers that were banned from the building. Usually just one particular day, but sometimes on multiple occasions. Just because something is printed in a newspaper doesn’t mean that the thing in question is unclassified. And if you have classified material in your possession and you don’t treat it properly (like locking it up in an appropriate safe when it’s going to be out of your hands, even for just a few minutes), then that can get you into some really serious trouble. If the publication in question contains a classified code word used in code word context and you don’t treat it appropriately, well then you’re probably done for. Feel free to try to guess which GURPS book from Steve Jackson Games that would be, but you would almost certainly be wrong.
  - jasonwatkinspdx 5y ago
    > Feel free to try to guess which GURPS book from Steve Jackson Games that would be, but you would almost certainly be wrong. I love this comment so much :P

lumpa 5y ago

> Also, I doubt this is a hnews concern, but for folks currently holding clearances just reading that story could put them in hot water. How would that work for folks holding clearances that, following one of several paths other than directly reading the article discussion (like reading some random user's comments page), get exposed to significant bits of the article? Come to think of it, how safe in general for folks with clearances is browsing HN, with its many discussions of military tech, intelligence topics, spycraft and security breaches news?

aww_dang 5y ago
Imagine dropping a few hundred hidden iframes of controversy on someone like that.
salawat 5y ago
As long as you report a breach, you're fine. Good luck figuring out who you're supposed to report to about that thing you aren't supposed to know about though. Thus is the Catch 22 of Quality Controlling. Information classification systems.

mcint 5y ago

Even though bellingcat reports resolution, re: reporting to NATO and removal of cards? I suppose trusting an outside org to have properly handled a NatSec breach would not be a part of NatSec procedures