10 ms·

NSA employee indicted for transmission and retention of defense information

DyslexicAtheist 5y ago
> According to the 26-count indictment, on thirteen occasions between February 14, 2018 and June 1, 2020, Unkenholz, lawfully having possession of, access to, and control over NDI, which he had reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully transmitted that information to another person who was not entitled to receive it. Mark Robert Unkenholz has this patent claim for key escrow: "Device for and method of cryptography that allows third party access" https://patents.justia.com/patent/5631961 https://patents.justia.com/patent/5631961
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- matthewdgreen 5y ago
  He also worked on Clipper apparently. But this patent seems to use public-key techniques for escrow, which Clipper didn't... probably because Clipper was hardware and couldn't handle the cost of those operations.
softwarebeware 5y ago
> Unkenholz allegedly retained the classified NDI within his personal email address. I love how whoever wrote this clearly does not understand technology, and thinks that somehow the _data_ was stored within the _address_.
- softwarebeware 5y ago
  But besides that, can we just take a facepalm to recognize an NSA employee sending _and_ keeping classified data in a personal email server. Like, how did he not know he would get caught, right?
  - astrea 5y ago
    Seems to be a recurring issue
  - mistrial9 5y ago
    isnt it obvious that the person believes that they ought to be able to trade that information? rational or irrational, this looks like a fight more than a theft
    - softwarebeware 5y ago
      Tell me more. I would think that everyone with a TOP SECRET/SCI clearance is really clear on what it entails. I can't see someone thinking they could copy it to personal email and send it to someone without a clearance.
      - trasz 5y ago
        Tbh I’d think there would be (technical) mechanisms in place to make this impossible.
      - vba616 5y ago
        What's the point of debating it? The press release seemed to give no information whatsoever that would clue us into motivation. I would like to see the indictment, if it's not secret itself. There wasn't a link, was there?
      - rakeman 5y ago
        It isn't really always clear on what it entails, for example the word "the" will appear in TS documents but you're allowed to use that word without worrying about this happening. Specific pieces of data or groups of data receive a classification based on the harm they can cause if disclosed improperly. However, an entire document receives a classification based on its most sensitive parts so it can be hard to determine what parts of it are actually sensitive. If you don't know, ask, so things like this don't happen. This person should have known better, I can imagine how it's possible to accidently transmit classified data on an unclassified network. But I have a hard time seeing someone make an honest mistake like that 13 times.
- vkou 5y ago
  It's a useful, if not technically precise, abstraction. Since it's part of an indictment, it is a magnet for pedantry. Just like how a long fall doesn't kill you, the sudden stop at the end does. It's a distinction without a difference.
  - dboreham 5y ago
    Lawyers drafting indictments directly related to a technical subject should have them proof read by someone with knowledge of that subject.
    - vkou 5y ago
      Which is excellent advice - and unless you're both a lawyer, and familiar with the conventions of this particular bit of law, you probably shouldn't make any assumptions about what should, and should not be written in this kind of indictment. Because you don't have knowledge of the subject. The subject at hand being the law.
      - vba616 5y ago
        Have you ever tried to explain associativity of boolean operators to a person with a law degree?
        vkou 5y ago
        No, but I have tried to explain to a number of very intelligent people that their CS degree does not make them a legal expert.
        vba616 5y ago
        Nobody ever asks programmers to provide legal opinions. On the other hand, understanding formal logic is of practical value in the legal industry; I was thinking of building searches to find electronic documents which is a real thing that (clueless) people (try to) do. Seems to me like it could potentially be very high stakes, at least in hindsight if you screw it up. I don't know if boolean logic is or used to be part of a law school curriculum. It just seems to me a bit surprising if it isn't.
acheron 5y ago
lsh123 5y ago
tomohawk 5y ago
- ozten 5y ago
  Do you have any links that document what she did that is worse than this NSA employee's behavior? My understanding is that she didn't use her personal email for classified information and continued to use a government provided system for that class of information.
  - lsh123 5y ago
    I am the author of the flagged post with a link to Wikipedia article on the subject (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy#Classified_information_in_emails https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controve...): “The FBI investigation found that 110 messages contained information that was classified at the time it was sent. Sixty-five of those emails were found to contain information classified as "Secret;" more than 20 contained "Top-Secret" information.” EDIT: compare with: “If convicted, Unkenholz faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in federal prison for each of the 13 counts of willful transmission of NDI and for each of the 13 counts of willful retention of NDI.”
    - ozten 5y ago
      Thank you!
    - lern_too_spel 5y ago
      - lsh123 5y ago
        “… 13 counts of willful retention of NDI” I highly doubt that anybody will buy “other people did this in the past too” as a defense argument. Though I am sure lawyers will try.
        5y ago
lallysingh 5y ago
IIRC, classified data is on an airgapped network. How'd he get it out? And after, why then email?
- zppln 5y ago
  Air-gapped doesn't necessarily imply that it's impossible to get data out via e.g. physical media (printing, memory stick...).
  - lallysingh 5y ago
    Yeah I'm assuming a USB stick. But then he emailed the files off of the stick? Why not mail the stick?
- TheAdamist 5y ago
  His brain is a possibility. Various information gets classified at different levels according to the classification guide for a program. It could be as simple as a program name in certain instances. Now I doubt they'd prosecute for inadvertent inclusion of minor yet technically classified things, but it's hard to know. See page 24+, in Security Classification Guidance Student Guide, for some examples of things in a classification guide. https://www.cdse.edu/Portals/124/Documents/student-guides/IF101-guide.pdf https://www.cdse.edu/Portals/124/Documents/student-guides/IF... (The French had a solution for air gapping the brain, but productivity becomes a problem).
academia_hack 5y ago
The phrasing in the press release makes it sound like this is some sort of intrinsically grave offense, but it's quite possibly an innocent mistake. It sounds like this guy's colleague switched companies from one where they were cleared to one where they were not, but they continued to communicate about classified stuff. Maybe that meant Unkenholz emailed a PDF marked TOP SECRET to his colleague in order to help some foreign entity harm US interests (obviously a terrible thing to do and worth being outraged about). But it could have also been him sending an email along the lines of "What SD cards did you order for [classified widget]? We're making more of them and I want to be sure I get all the same parts that you did for the prototype?" Both cases violate the letter of the law, but locking a human being in a cage for a decade or more over the second one seems like a horrific misinterpretation of the concept of justice. Wish the press release was clearer on what side of the line this case falls on.
- 35fbe7d3d5b9 5y ago
  Popehat notes that this kind of reporting often oversells the likely sentence: https://www.popehat.com/2013/02/05/crime-whale-sushi-sentence-eleventy-million-years/ https://www.popehat.com/2013/02/05/crime-whale-sushi-sentenc... So it’s very possible this could end with a far less significant penalty, depending on the circumstances.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > Popehat notes that this kind of reporting often oversells the likely sentence This isn't reporting and it doesn't even purport to characterize the likely sentence except by saying “Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties.”
- kejaed 5y ago
  It’s a little more than “letter of the law” when he’s using a personal email address for NSA work, and also sending anything classified outside of official channels. He definitely knew better.
  - 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
jmpman 5y ago
The crime is supposed to fit the punishment. Many of these leaks can result in American deaths, so why is the death penalty not an option?
- rurban 5y ago
  260 years jail time is practically the death penalty

> According to the 26-count indictment, on thirteen occasions between February 14, 2018 and June 1, 2020, Unkenholz, lawfully having possession of, access to, and control over NDI, which he had reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully transmitted that information to another person who was not entitled to receive it. Mark Robert Unkenholz has this patent claim for key escrow: "Device for and method of cryptography that allows third party access" https://patents.justia.com/patent/5631961 https://patents.justia.com/patent/5631961

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
matthewdgreen 5y ago
He also worked on Clipper apparently. But this patent seems to use public-key techniques for escrow, which Clipper didn't... probably because Clipper was hardware and couldn't handle the cost of those operations.

softwarebeware 5y ago

> Unkenholz allegedly retained the classified NDI within his personal email address. I love how whoever wrote this clearly does not understand technology, and thinks that somehow the _data_ was stored within the _address_.

softwarebeware 5y ago
But besides that, can we just take a facepalm to recognize an NSA employee sending _and_ keeping classified data in a personal email server. Like, how did he not know he would get caught, right?
- astrea 5y ago
  Seems to be a recurring issue
- mistrial9 5y ago
  isnt it obvious that the person believes that they ought to be able to trade that information? rational or irrational, this looks like a fight more than a theft
  - softwarebeware 5y ago
    Tell me more. I would think that everyone with a TOP SECRET/SCI clearance is really clear on what it entails. I can't see someone thinking they could copy it to personal email and send it to someone without a clearance.
    - trasz 5y ago
      Tbh I’d think there would be (technical) mechanisms in place to make this impossible.
    - vba616 5y ago
      What's the point of debating it? The press release seemed to give no information whatsoever that would clue us into motivation. I would like to see the indictment, if it's not secret itself. There wasn't a link, was there?
    - rakeman 5y ago
      It isn't really always clear on what it entails, for example the word "the" will appear in TS documents but you're allowed to use that word without worrying about this happening. Specific pieces of data or groups of data receive a classification based on the harm they can cause if disclosed improperly. However, an entire document receives a classification based on its most sensitive parts so it can be hard to determine what parts of it are actually sensitive. If you don't know, ask, so things like this don't happen. This person should have known better, I can imagine how it's possible to accidently transmit classified data on an unclassified network. But I have a hard time seeing someone make an honest mistake like that 13 times.
vkou 5y ago
It's a useful, if not technically precise, abstraction. Since it's part of an indictment, it is a magnet for pedantry. Just like how a long fall doesn't kill you, the sudden stop at the end does. It's a distinction without a difference.
- dboreham 5y ago
  Lawyers drafting indictments directly related to a technical subject should have them proof read by someone with knowledge of that subject.
  - vkou 5y ago
    Which is excellent advice - and unless you're both a lawyer, and familiar with the conventions of this particular bit of law, you probably shouldn't make any assumptions about what should, and should not be written in this kind of indictment. Because you don't have knowledge of the subject. The subject at hand being the law.
    - vba616 5y ago
      Have you ever tried to explain associativity of boolean operators to a person with a law degree?
      - vkou 5y ago
        No, but I have tried to explain to a number of very intelligent people that their CS degree does not make them a legal expert.
        vba616 5y ago
        Nobody ever asks programmers to provide legal opinions. On the other hand, understanding formal logic is of practical value in the legal industry; I was thinking of building searches to find electronic documents which is a real thing that (clueless) people (try to) do. Seems to me like it could potentially be very high stakes, at least in hindsight if you screw it up. I don't know if boolean logic is or used to be part of a law school curriculum. It just seems to me a bit surprising if it isn't.

acheron 5y ago

lsh123 5y ago

tomohawk 5y ago

ozten 5y ago
Do you have any links that document what she did that is worse than this NSA employee's behavior? My understanding is that she didn't use her personal email for classified information and continued to use a government provided system for that class of information.
- lsh123 5y ago
  I am the author of the flagged post with a link to Wikipedia article on the subject (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy#Classified_information_in_emails https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controve...): “The FBI investigation found that 110 messages contained information that was classified at the time it was sent. Sixty-five of those emails were found to contain information classified as "Secret;" more than 20 contained "Top-Secret" information.” EDIT: compare with: “If convicted, Unkenholz faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in federal prison for each of the 13 counts of willful transmission of NDI and for each of the 13 counts of willful retention of NDI.”
  - ozten 5y ago
    Thank you!
  - lern_too_spel 5y ago
    - lsh123 5y ago
      “… 13 counts of willful retention of NDI” I highly doubt that anybody will buy “other people did this in the past too” as a defense argument. Though I am sure lawyers will try.
      - 5y ago

lallysingh 5y ago

IIRC, classified data is on an airgapped network. How'd he get it out? And after, why then email?

zppln 5y ago
Air-gapped doesn't necessarily imply that it's impossible to get data out via e.g. physical media (printing, memory stick...).
- lallysingh 5y ago
  Yeah I'm assuming a USB stick. But then he emailed the files off of the stick? Why not mail the stick?
TheAdamist 5y ago
His brain is a possibility. Various information gets classified at different levels according to the classification guide for a program. It could be as simple as a program name in certain instances. Now I doubt they'd prosecute for inadvertent inclusion of minor yet technically classified things, but it's hard to know. See page 24+, in Security Classification Guidance Student Guide, for some examples of things in a classification guide. https://www.cdse.edu/Portals/124/Documents/student-guides/IF101-guide.pdf https://www.cdse.edu/Portals/124/Documents/student-guides/IF... (The French had a solution for air gapping the brain, but productivity becomes a problem).

academia_hack 5y ago

The phrasing in the press release makes it sound like this is some sort of intrinsically grave offense, but it's quite possibly an innocent mistake. It sounds like this guy's colleague switched companies from one where they were cleared to one where they were not, but they continued to communicate about classified stuff. Maybe that meant Unkenholz emailed a PDF marked TOP SECRET to his colleague in order to help some foreign entity harm US interests (obviously a terrible thing to do and worth being outraged about). But it could have also been him sending an email along the lines of "What SD cards did you order for [classified widget]? We're making more of them and I want to be sure I get all the same parts that you did for the prototype?" Both cases violate the letter of the law, but locking a human being in a cage for a decade or more over the second one seems like a horrific misinterpretation of the concept of justice. Wish the press release was clearer on what side of the line this case falls on.

35fbe7d3d5b9 5y ago
Popehat notes that this kind of reporting often oversells the likely sentence: https://www.popehat.com/2013/02/05/crime-whale-sushi-sentence-eleventy-million-years/ https://www.popehat.com/2013/02/05/crime-whale-sushi-sentenc... So it’s very possible this could end with a far less significant penalty, depending on the circumstances.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Popehat notes that this kind of reporting often oversells the likely sentence This isn't reporting and it doesn't even purport to characterize the likely sentence except by saying “Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties.”
kejaed 5y ago
It’s a little more than “letter of the law” when he’s using a personal email address for NSA work, and also sending anything classified outside of official channels. He definitely knew better.
- 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

jmpman 5y ago

The crime is supposed to fit the punishment. Many of these leaks can result in American deaths, so why is the death penalty not an option?

rurban 5y ago
260 years jail time is practically the death penalty