4 ms·

> Unkenholz allegedly retained the classified NDI within his personal email address. I love how whoever wrote this clearly does not understand technology, and

> 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.

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.