4 ms·

Well, I mean China already pwned opm.gov and got SF-86 on all fed employees a few years ago. The FBI gives people who have clearances on how adversaries will at

by b8 2y ago

Well, I mean China already pwned opm.gov and got SF-86 on all fed employees a few years ago. The FBI gives people who have clearances on how adversaries will attempt to get information and what to do. Mainly it's just alerting the employers security office, and former feds get an email to reach out to for questions/concerns post employment. The security clearance process is broken and mostly BS. The head of DCSA and the FBI NYC office got caught doing illegal stuff which the process is suppose to detect. Also, it's better to go to jail or quit for blackmail then to comply with blackmail, because it caries worst sentences and doesn't have a statue of limitations. Many people with clearances have bad backgrounds and just being honest is all they're looking for in the process. My friend and I even admitted to a bunch of CFAA felonies and was never charged. My friend got a TS/SCI with hacking within the past year of his BI.

Psillisp 2y ago
[flagged]
- b8 2y ago
  I mean OPs post is whataboutism. What if the kid has skeletons in his closet or calling the kids randomers etc. The security clearance process is long and is a joke imo. DCSA often gives interim clearances after running a credit and criminal check with no red flags (including TS/SCI). Then they interview coworkers, boses and family members. They ask basic questions such as does x associate with criminals or illegal stuff, drink or do drugs etc. A lot of bad apples pass. The blog post is FUD imo.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    >What if the kid has skeletons in his closet I mean, we already found a few skeletons >The security clearance process is long and is a joke imo. Don't fully agree, but it is indeed overly long. But as is the theme of this Musk adminsitration; Just because you think something is bad or inefficient doesnt'r give you safeway to skip over it entirely. These last 2 weeks are proving the importannce of clearance more than anything else has over decades. >A lot of bad apples pass. This isn't even an apple at this point. You're letting a skunk rummage through the entire barrel unaccounted for.
    - genewitch 2y ago
      What skeletons? You mean the racist, misogynistic, eugenicist tweets like "I'm going to marry an Indian woman"? Yes, I actually heard paid professional news anchors describe that tweet that way.
      - johnnyanmac 2y ago
        Pretty sure that's a different person. I'd rather not veer off topic when this story right here is already talking about a 19 year old previously fired for leaking company data to competitors. We can all read this linked article just fine.
- simoncion 2y ago
  Eh? PP's commentary is spot on. I used to do defense contracting. The primary things the interviewer is looking for are "How vulnerable to blackmail are you?" and (relatedly) "How forthcoming are you about the illegal or borderline legal things you've done in the past, and are you willing to (or have you already) stopped doing them?". Felonies shouldn't disqualify you from employment for the rest of your life, and neither should association with the seedy underbelly of society.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    1. depends on the "felony" 2. For stuff as sensitive as this it makes sense to be extremely cautious. Doesn't mean the process is perfect, but we're seeing in real time what happens if you skip it.
    - simoncion 2y ago
      1) What felonies do you believe should disqualify you from working to earn a living for the rest of your natural life once you've served your time in prison? 2) Assuming that this is what's actually going on, this is far from the first time that the State Department has been strongarmed into providing a security clearance to a buddy of a President who has been appointed to a government position. The world didn't end any of those times, and it won't end this time, either.
      - johnnyanmac 2y ago
        1. Hard question to answer. But I do believe you should not have clearance to any sensitive documents if you don't have a clean record. There's a reason clearance is such an invasive process. 2. We are in unprecedented times. And honor is clearly thrown out the window. Pretty much every day of the last few weeks would make Watergate look like a slow news day. So no, I'm not reassured at all. Especially since this is software and many, many long term things can occur well past the news cycle. It could be "leaked", sold to foreign actors, simply messed with which will cause someone (which is statistically not us individually) a crisis, or simply slow down payments when they inevitably have to unmuck everything. It will cause damage, that's not really up for debate. Just because is doesn't affect me directly doesn't mean I'm not worried. Btw, fwiw I'm pretty sure Trump already stalled one of my interviews indirectly. So it also is personal.
- dang 2y ago
  Please don't do this here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - Psillisp 2y ago
    Sorry, next time I’ll have AI generate five paragraphs.
    - dang 2y ago
      What we want are thoughtful, substantive comments written by humans. If you can't or don't want to post like that, please don't post until you can and do. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

by b8 2y ago

Psillisp 2y ago

[flagged]

b8 2y ago
I mean OPs post is whataboutism. What if the kid has skeletons in his closet or calling the kids randomers etc. The security clearance process is long and is a joke imo. DCSA often gives interim clearances after running a credit and criminal check with no red flags (including TS/SCI). Then they interview coworkers, boses and family members. They ask basic questions such as does x associate with criminals or illegal stuff, drink or do drugs etc. A lot of bad apples pass. The blog post is FUD imo.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  >What if the kid has skeletons in his closet I mean, we already found a few skeletons >The security clearance process is long and is a joke imo. Don't fully agree, but it is indeed overly long. But as is the theme of this Musk adminsitration; Just because you think something is bad or inefficient doesnt'r give you safeway to skip over it entirely. These last 2 weeks are proving the importannce of clearance more than anything else has over decades. >A lot of bad apples pass. This isn't even an apple at this point. You're letting a skunk rummage through the entire barrel unaccounted for.
  - genewitch 2y ago
    What skeletons? You mean the racist, misogynistic, eugenicist tweets like "I'm going to marry an Indian woman"? Yes, I actually heard paid professional news anchors describe that tweet that way.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      Pretty sure that's a different person. I'd rather not veer off topic when this story right here is already talking about a 19 year old previously fired for leaking company data to competitors. We can all read this linked article just fine.
simoncion 2y ago
Eh? PP's commentary is spot on. I used to do defense contracting. The primary things the interviewer is looking for are "How vulnerable to blackmail are you?" and (relatedly) "How forthcoming are you about the illegal or borderline legal things you've done in the past, and are you willing to (or have you already) stopped doing them?". Felonies shouldn't disqualify you from employment for the rest of your life, and neither should association with the seedy underbelly of society.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  1. depends on the "felony" 2. For stuff as sensitive as this it makes sense to be extremely cautious. Doesn't mean the process is perfect, but we're seeing in real time what happens if you skip it.
  - simoncion 2y ago
    1) What felonies do you believe should disqualify you from working to earn a living for the rest of your natural life once you've served your time in prison? 2) Assuming that this is what's actually going on, this is far from the first time that the State Department has been strongarmed into providing a security clearance to a buddy of a President who has been appointed to a government position. The world didn't end any of those times, and it won't end this time, either.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      1. Hard question to answer. But I do believe you should not have clearance to any sensitive documents if you don't have a clean record. There's a reason clearance is such an invasive process. 2. We are in unprecedented times. And honor is clearly thrown out the window. Pretty much every day of the last few weeks would make Watergate look like a slow news day. So no, I'm not reassured at all. Especially since this is software and many, many long term things can occur well past the news cycle. It could be "leaked", sold to foreign actors, simply messed with which will cause someone (which is statistically not us individually) a crisis, or simply slow down payments when they inevitably have to unmuck everything. It will cause damage, that's not really up for debate. Just because is doesn't affect me directly doesn't mean I'm not worried. Btw, fwiw I'm pretty sure Trump already stalled one of my interviews indirectly. So it also is personal.
dang 2y ago
Please don't do this here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- Psillisp 2y ago
  Sorry, next time I’ll have AI generate five paragraphs.
  - dang 2y ago
    What we want are thoughtful, substantive comments written by humans. If you can't or don't want to post like that, please don't post until you can and do. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html