8 ms·

I agree it's not necessarily the same, but also think that it's bad to have any social media in a top secret context. That said, it's pretty obvious the bias t

I agree it's not necessarily the same, but also think that it's bad to have any social media in a top secret context. That said, it's pretty obvious the bias the source has: - "and posted it to the Chinese government-affiliated platform." - "social media platform tied to America’s top adversary" The problem here is people sharing stuff publicly which they are obviously not supposed to. The rest is just theater, even if technically somewhat worse. If you solve the root problem, the variation that makes it slightly worse this time is solved at the same time.

baybal2 5y ago
Even if they don't share, it is a piece of spyware they have on their phone, called Google Android. I believe PLA uses its assets within Google, and other American dotcoms to the fullest extend, and they already pulled every info they can through their Android Store accounts on them. Even a running meme of spy agency, the Saudi Army intel wing managed to have their men operate within Google for years. Imagine now what Chinese could.
- kbenson 5y ago
  Yes. Don't allow smartphones around top secret facilities? That seems a sane precaution. Or require them be vetted.
  - baybal2 5y ago
    Even if they carry them off duty only, it's a crapton of useful intel info that can be harvested from more or less open data.
    - kbenson 5y ago
      Yes. So it people tagging pictures or leaving reviews on Yelp. Is your suggestion that off-duty people during their personal time should not use social media for purely personal ends with personal info, as long as it's for things that are not already to not be done while working with security clearance? Otherwise, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
      - falcolas 5y ago
        Given that fitbits and their ilk have exposed the specific locations and layouts of airbases, perhaps they should be a bit more careful with what technology they use, even in their offtime.
        kbenson 5y ago
        Checking them in at a locker at the edge of base is probably sufficient, at least for an airbase. It's not like you can actually hide those in the days ubiquitous satellite imagery, right? For some other types of facilities, maybe check them in off-site somewhere before you transport people in (because otherwise how secret can it be if you can just follow someone's car?). Letting people transmit GPS coordinates while walking around a military facility though? Yeah, maybe that's not a good idea.
        baybal2 5y ago
        Not that. For example you can easily guess everything about ones family members, his work schedule, browsing history, ruffle his personal email/facebook — stuff that often gets mixed with work correspondence, financials, home location, other gadgets, other people in his first circle — people often meet with other servicemen off duty. A lot in other words.
  - fakedang 5y ago
    Once upon a time (7-8 years ago), they would issue govt-vetted smartphones to even subcontractors. Wonder how that culture changed....
- nightpool 5y ago
  > the Saudi Army intel wing managed to have their men operate within Google for years. Do you have a source for this? I spent a while searching, but I couldn't find anything that would corroborate your claim
  - williamscales 5y ago
    This is the case that I can recall, it was at Twitter: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/technology/twitter-saudi-arabia-spies.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/technology/twitter-saudi-...
Kretinsky 5y ago
As a non-american, it's always interesting to see the point of view of the major military power. Why is China "America's top adversary"? Aside from the OPSEC issue, which is understandable, why does the author - and I guess it's a widespread view - considers China as America's utmost adversary? Can't there exist two rich and prosperous countries? Why does the author uses such jingoist terms? How should other countries consider America, then?
- yborg 5y ago
  Everyone is an expert on the Internet, this is some guy's opinion, not a statement of official US government policy. Also makes it sound more dramatic, especially with the Air Force General "looking impressed" hot take. The fact of the matter is that it would be a bigger problem if a top secret aircraft was sitting outside exposed to the sky in full daylight in the first place, where Gen. Kelly's and presumably everyone else's surveillance satellites could count the rivets on the thing.
  - Frost1x 5y ago
    You know they do have to fly these things for real testing. Only so much can be simulated with computers and wind tunnels. It's not a matter if it's exposed, it's a matter of when and where it's exposed. Security through obscurity is very much still a legitimate thing for a lot of aspects. We're not quite to a point yet where you have continuous ultra high resolution satellite imagery of the ground where you could feasibly record these things and eventually find them. Chances are you just don't have the data unless you know all the places to look. In the not too far off future it might be a bit more difficult. We're getting closer to that point for sure given export controls on AI software used in geospatial imagery analysis: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/06/2019-27649/addition-of-software-specially-designed-to-automate-the-analysis-of-geospatial-imagery-to-the-export https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/06/2019-27... Part of this I suspect is geared at stifling an adversary from utilizing lower resolution imagery data to identify targets of interest to point higher resolution imagery or other sensors and agents at to collect intel.
    - 5y ago

baybal2 5y ago

Even if they don't share, it is a piece of spyware they have on their phone, called Google Android. I believe PLA uses its assets within Google, and other American dotcoms to the fullest extend, and they already pulled every info they can through their Android Store accounts on them. Even a running meme of spy agency, the Saudi Army intel wing managed to have their men operate within Google for years. Imagine now what Chinese could.

kbenson 5y ago
Yes. Don't allow smartphones around top secret facilities? That seems a sane precaution. Or require them be vetted.
- baybal2 5y ago
  Even if they carry them off duty only, it's a crapton of useful intel info that can be harvested from more or less open data.
  - kbenson 5y ago
    Yes. So it people tagging pictures or leaving reviews on Yelp. Is your suggestion that off-duty people during their personal time should not use social media for purely personal ends with personal info, as long as it's for things that are not already to not be done while working with security clearance? Otherwise, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
    - falcolas 5y ago
      Given that fitbits and their ilk have exposed the specific locations and layouts of airbases, perhaps they should be a bit more careful with what technology they use, even in their offtime.
      - kbenson 5y ago
        Checking them in at a locker at the edge of base is probably sufficient, at least for an airbase. It's not like you can actually hide those in the days ubiquitous satellite imagery, right? For some other types of facilities, maybe check them in off-site somewhere before you transport people in (because otherwise how secret can it be if you can just follow someone's car?). Letting people transmit GPS coordinates while walking around a military facility though? Yeah, maybe that's not a good idea.
        baybal2 5y ago
        Not that. For example you can easily guess everything about ones family members, his work schedule, browsing history, ruffle his personal email/facebook — stuff that often gets mixed with work correspondence, financials, home location, other gadgets, other people in his first circle — people often meet with other servicemen off duty. A lot in other words.
- fakedang 5y ago
  Once upon a time (7-8 years ago), they would issue govt-vetted smartphones to even subcontractors. Wonder how that culture changed....
nightpool 5y ago
> the Saudi Army intel wing managed to have their men operate within Google for years. Do you have a source for this? I spent a while searching, but I couldn't find anything that would corroborate your claim
- williamscales 5y ago
  This is the case that I can recall, it was at Twitter: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/technology/twitter-saudi-arabia-spies.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/technology/twitter-saudi-...

Kretinsky 5y ago

As a non-american, it's always interesting to see the point of view of the major military power. Why is China "America's top adversary"? Aside from the OPSEC issue, which is understandable, why does the author - and I guess it's a widespread view - considers China as America's utmost adversary? Can't there exist two rich and prosperous countries? Why does the author uses such jingoist terms? How should other countries consider America, then?

yborg 5y ago
Everyone is an expert on the Internet, this is some guy's opinion, not a statement of official US government policy. Also makes it sound more dramatic, especially with the Air Force General "looking impressed" hot take. The fact of the matter is that it would be a bigger problem if a top secret aircraft was sitting outside exposed to the sky in full daylight in the first place, where Gen. Kelly's and presumably everyone else's surveillance satellites could count the rivets on the thing.
- Frost1x 5y ago
  You know they do have to fly these things for real testing. Only so much can be simulated with computers and wind tunnels. It's not a matter if it's exposed, it's a matter of when and where it's exposed. Security through obscurity is very much still a legitimate thing for a lot of aspects. We're not quite to a point yet where you have continuous ultra high resolution satellite imagery of the ground where you could feasibly record these things and eventually find them. Chances are you just don't have the data unless you know all the places to look. In the not too far off future it might be a bit more difficult. We're getting closer to that point for sure given export controls on AI software used in geospatial imagery analysis: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/06/2019-27649/addition-of-software-specially-designed-to-automate-the-analysis-of-geospatial-imagery-to-the-export https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/06/2019-27... Part of this I suspect is geared at stifling an adversary from utilizing lower resolution imagery data to identify targets of interest to point higher resolution imagery or other sensors and agents at to collect intel.
  - 5y ago