28 ms·

> They could be you, they could be me! Couldn't be me: the private sector pays me waaaaaaaay more. Also, you can't work for the feds if you ever touch the gan

> They could be you, they could be me! Couldn't be me: the private sector pays me waaaaaaaay more. Also, you can't work for the feds if you ever touch the ganja, which is ridiculous. Everyone I personally know in infosec leads a very... alternative west-coast lifestyle which is not conducive to career progression in an east-coast, button-down-shirt environment.

nanidin 5y ago
> Also, you can't work for the feds if you ever touch the ganja, which is ridiculous I believe it is possible to get security clearance after cessation of drugs for multiple years, even drugs like Heroin. I found the full rules[0] while reading an AMA on /r/SecurityClearance. [0] https://www.dni.gov/files/NCSC/documents/Regulations/SEAD-4-Adjudicative-Guidelines-U.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/NCSC/documents/Regulations/SEAD-4-...
loxias 5y ago
This. I entertained the idea of working in the public sector a while ago, for a brief time, until I learned that pot is fine in my past, but not in my present. "How the heck do you expect me to get the code written?" Also, I've been told that getting a clearance is more burden than blessing. You have restrictions that an "ordinary person" doesn't have, along with criminal penalties for violating them. Whereas, without a clearance, if they really need you for something, they'll bring you in anyway.
- jdironman 5y ago
  Not sure I understand those last two sentences. Could you clarify?
  - balls187 5y ago
    Things may have changed, but in my prior life when I had a clearance, for example, dating (or marrying for that matter) a foreign national would result in heavy vetting, including possibly losing your clearance and/or being terminated.
    - nirse 5y ago
      I hope it would have just been your contract that would have been terminated? ;-)
      - balls187 5y ago
        These days I don't believe spying results in death, just a long vacation at club fed.
  - frickinLasers 5y ago
    Don't do drugs (including marijuana), don't get blackout drunk, don't talk about your work, don't need psychiatric help... For the last sentence...Trump had all sorts of clearance when he clearly should not have. But he was in an important position.
    - garmaine 5y ago
      > don't need psychiatric help Does that include regular old things like ADHD meds?
      - frickinLasers 5y ago
        I don't know. I haven't worked in that system for many years. That said, it was more received wisdom than a written rule, and I was aware of exceptions who were prescribed more than ADHD meds.
        garmaine 5y ago
        We’ll I mean the ADHD meds I’m prescribed happens to also be a popular street drug, so I wouldn’t trust them to differentiate.
      - skoskie 5y ago
        No it does not.
    - vxNsr 5y ago
      Putting aside the politics of it for a second, all clearence stems from the executive branch which stems from the president. Saying the president shouldn't have clearance doesn't make a lot of sense, he's the one who authorized it. He's the one who decides who gets it. Anyone who thinks differently is arguing for a shadow gov, i.e. unelected bureaucrats who answer to no one and can make decisions unilaterally without consequence... not exactly democracy.
      - frickinLasers 5y ago
  - BeetleB 5y ago
    Friend of mine is head of IT for some government agency. Not a spooky one - just a routine agency. However, given the nature of IT and the data they need to store - they are required to get security clearance. For him it's been a minor nuisance at worst. He has strong restrictions on travel. I think he needs approval to travel abroad. He has relatives in other countries and visits them often, so it can't be too much of a nuisance. I believe he told me that he does have to report details of where he went in each country and who he interacted with upon his return. Not sure about the details. Official website: https://www.dm.usda.gov/ohsec/TravelResource.htm https://www.dm.usda.gov/ohsec/TravelResource.htm
- JamesSwift 5y ago
  > I've been told that getting a clearance is more burden than blessing Yes it definitely can be, but depends on your personality and stage of life. You are always cognizant of having a clearance and the need to maintain it, and so you consider that in your every day life. You also have to open your life up in uncomfortable ways, even if your only objection is in principal. You probably don't sweat it too much later in life since you generally are a more 'boring' person, but I had mine in my mid 20's so was a lot more active in terms of social life. One time I was in downtown SF with a buddy hitting up bars etc and eventually had to cut out early because things were getting more drug oriented. I also used to play a lot of cards before getting a clearance and had contacts who were in some shady stuff. I basically excommunicated them from my life to avoid the clearance hassle.
TremendousJudge 5y ago
you can do the really spooky stuff without going to prison. that's why they do it
Ms-J 5y ago
This is very much the truth, I used to work in infosec. Plus the moral implications of working for the feds! Too much on my conscience.
Fnoord 5y ago
> Also, you can't work for the feds if you ever touch the ganja, which is ridiculous. Calling it 'ridiculous' removes the debate concerning the pros and cons on such rule. If you consider someone can become vulnerable if they're addicted (to anything, really) then it makes sense to be wary of a drugs addiction. Especially if the resource the person is addicted to is illegal. That being said, I'd find it reasonable if they OK'ed medical marihuana usage. I hope my gov (NL) does.
- jackson1442 5y ago
  Well it's a comparison. Not once on the security clearance paperwork is alcohol mentioned, while if you have smoked/eaten/etc. marijuana at ALL in the past 7 years, it's practically an instant deny unless it was under some exigent circumstance. You can even be denied if you don't partake but are close contacts with other marijuana users. Obviously if someone is _addicted_ to either, that is a security risk. But the extent to which they reject people for recreational marijuana use is laughable.
  - cosmojg 5y ago
    Can't you just lie?
    - skoskie 5y ago
      That is not wise. You do have to take a lie detector test, and they are actually good at reading the results.
    - jackson1442 5y ago
      They contact all your close contacts listed on the paperwork. Lying also constitutes perjury in this case. The unofficial advice I’ve heard is to not even bother with SC if you use weed. Generally, it will be found out. I looked into this as needing an SC was a possibility with my current job.
- teawrecks 5y ago
  So you don't think any alcoholics work for the NSA?
skoskie 5y ago
Here’s a different picture. Put in your 20y at NSA right out of school. Get retirement benefits, and then move to the private sector, where they pay a premium for NSA experience. Or, do contract work for NSA since you already have clearance and contacts. They will pay you about 4x more as a contractor.

nanidin 5y ago

> Also, you can't work for the feds if you ever touch the ganja, which is ridiculous I believe it is possible to get security clearance after cessation of drugs for multiple years, even drugs like Heroin. I found the full rules[0] while reading an AMA on /r/SecurityClearance. [0] https://www.dni.gov/files/NCSC/documents/Regulations/SEAD-4-Adjudicative-Guidelines-U.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/NCSC/documents/Regulations/SEAD-4-...

loxias 5y ago

This. I entertained the idea of working in the public sector a while ago, for a brief time, until I learned that pot is fine in my past, but not in my present. "How the heck do you expect me to get the code written?" Also, I've been told that getting a clearance is more burden than blessing. You have restrictions that an "ordinary person" doesn't have, along with criminal penalties for violating them. Whereas, without a clearance, if they really need you for something, they'll bring you in anyway.

jdironman 5y ago
Not sure I understand those last two sentences. Could you clarify?
- balls187 5y ago
  Things may have changed, but in my prior life when I had a clearance, for example, dating (or marrying for that matter) a foreign national would result in heavy vetting, including possibly losing your clearance and/or being terminated.
  - nirse 5y ago
    I hope it would have just been your contract that would have been terminated? ;-)
    - balls187 5y ago
      These days I don't believe spying results in death, just a long vacation at club fed.
- frickinLasers 5y ago
  Don't do drugs (including marijuana), don't get blackout drunk, don't talk about your work, don't need psychiatric help... For the last sentence...Trump had all sorts of clearance when he clearly should not have. But he was in an important position.
  - garmaine 5y ago
    > don't need psychiatric help Does that include regular old things like ADHD meds?
    - frickinLasers 5y ago
      I don't know. I haven't worked in that system for many years. That said, it was more received wisdom than a written rule, and I was aware of exceptions who were prescribed more than ADHD meds.
      - garmaine 5y ago
        We’ll I mean the ADHD meds I’m prescribed happens to also be a popular street drug, so I wouldn’t trust them to differentiate.
    - skoskie 5y ago
      No it does not.
  - vxNsr 5y ago
    Putting aside the politics of it for a second, all clearence stems from the executive branch which stems from the president. Saying the president shouldn't have clearance doesn't make a lot of sense, he's the one who authorized it. He's the one who decides who gets it. Anyone who thinks differently is arguing for a shadow gov, i.e. unelected bureaucrats who answer to no one and can make decisions unilaterally without consequence... not exactly democracy.
    - frickinLasers 5y ago
- BeetleB 5y ago
  Friend of mine is head of IT for some government agency. Not a spooky one - just a routine agency. However, given the nature of IT and the data they need to store - they are required to get security clearance. For him it's been a minor nuisance at worst. He has strong restrictions on travel. I think he needs approval to travel abroad. He has relatives in other countries and visits them often, so it can't be too much of a nuisance. I believe he told me that he does have to report details of where he went in each country and who he interacted with upon his return. Not sure about the details. Official website: https://www.dm.usda.gov/ohsec/TravelResource.htm https://www.dm.usda.gov/ohsec/TravelResource.htm
JamesSwift 5y ago
> I've been told that getting a clearance is more burden than blessing Yes it definitely can be, but depends on your personality and stage of life. You are always cognizant of having a clearance and the need to maintain it, and so you consider that in your every day life. You also have to open your life up in uncomfortable ways, even if your only objection is in principal. You probably don't sweat it too much later in life since you generally are a more 'boring' person, but I had mine in my mid 20's so was a lot more active in terms of social life. One time I was in downtown SF with a buddy hitting up bars etc and eventually had to cut out early because things were getting more drug oriented. I also used to play a lot of cards before getting a clearance and had contacts who were in some shady stuff. I basically excommunicated them from my life to avoid the clearance hassle.

TremendousJudge 5y ago

you can do the really spooky stuff without going to prison. that's why they do it

Ms-J 5y ago

This is very much the truth, I used to work in infosec. Plus the moral implications of working for the feds! Too much on my conscience.

Fnoord 5y ago

> Also, you can't work for the feds if you ever touch the ganja, which is ridiculous. Calling it 'ridiculous' removes the debate concerning the pros and cons on such rule. If you consider someone can become vulnerable if they're addicted (to anything, really) then it makes sense to be wary of a drugs addiction. Especially if the resource the person is addicted to is illegal. That being said, I'd find it reasonable if they OK'ed medical marihuana usage. I hope my gov (NL) does.

jackson1442 5y ago
Well it's a comparison. Not once on the security clearance paperwork is alcohol mentioned, while if you have smoked/eaten/etc. marijuana at ALL in the past 7 years, it's practically an instant deny unless it was under some exigent circumstance. You can even be denied if you don't partake but are close contacts with other marijuana users. Obviously if someone is _addicted_ to either, that is a security risk. But the extent to which they reject people for recreational marijuana use is laughable.
- cosmojg 5y ago
  Can't you just lie?
  - skoskie 5y ago
    That is not wise. You do have to take a lie detector test, and they are actually good at reading the results.
  - jackson1442 5y ago
    They contact all your close contacts listed on the paperwork. Lying also constitutes perjury in this case. The unofficial advice I’ve heard is to not even bother with SC if you use weed. Generally, it will be found out. I looked into this as needing an SC was a possibility with my current job.
teawrecks 5y ago
So you don't think any alcoholics work for the NSA?

skoskie 5y ago

Here’s a different picture. Put in your 20y at NSA right out of school. Get retirement benefits, and then move to the private sector, where they pay a premium for NSA experience. Or, do contract work for NSA since you already have clearance and contacts. They will pay you about 4x more as a contractor.