4 ms·
I for one, after doing a bit of reserach, was shocked to find out the person in question is apparently completely unqualified for the job (if him pasting sensit
by tw04 9mo ago
I for one, after doing a bit of reserach, was shocked to find out the person in question is apparently completely unqualified for the job (if him pasting sensitive information into public ChatGPT didn't already make that abundantly clear). But the highlight from his Wikipedia page is this one:
>In December 2025, Politico reported that Gottumukkala had requested to see access to a controlled access program—an act that would require taking a polygraph—in June. Gottumukkala failed the polygraph in the final weeks of July. The Department of Homeland Security began investigating the circumstances surrounding the polygraph test the following month and suspended six career staffers, telling them that the polygraph did not need to be administered.[12]
So the guy failed a polygraph to access a highly controlled system full of confidential information, and the solution to that problem was to fire the people in charge of ensuring the system was secure.
We're speed running America into the ground and half the country is willfully ignorant to it happening.
- TheSkyHasEyes 9mo agoNot defending the buy but completely might be inaccurate. He has a masters in comp sci eng. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhu_Gottumukkala https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhu_Gottumukkala I do realize this scholastic achievement is not indication he knows what he is doing.
- pm90 9mo agoAnd an MBA. He seems like a lot of people I know who skim through their technical degrees just to get the credentials. And my experience is that Masters is often easier to get than a Bachelors. Anyway what he did makes it abundantly clear that this person should not be head of security for anything.
- joshcsimmons 9mo agoIt’s from UT Arlington - does that even count?
- fakeBeerDrinker 9mo agoYes
- chrisco255 9mo agoPolygraphs have to be one of the most awkward / bizarre requirements for accessing a program. They are not scientifically reliable.
- StevenWaterman 9mo agoThey're somewhat effective at stopping people applying if those people know they will have to lie
- bigfatkitten 9mo agoThere is a reason why nobody uses them but the U.S.
- zirak 9mo agoThe US uses them more pervasively it seems, but there's still remnants of it elsewhere. The UK uses them for post-conviction monitoring in certain offenses: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/police-crime-sentencing-and-courts-bill-2021-equality-statements/polygraph-testing-measures-in-the-police-crime-sentencing-courts-bill-equalities-impact-assessment https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/police-crime-sent... ...and there's more than one British polygraph group: BPA and BPS (https://www.britishpolygraphassociation.org/ https://www.britishpolygraphassociation.org/, https://polygraph.org.uk/ https://polygraph.org.uk/) Australia did indeed reject the polygraph for security clearance: https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2006/10/19/australian-security-intelligence-organisation-asio-rejects-polygraphs/ https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2006/10/19/australian-securit... Canada however does seem to use it as part of their intelligence screening: https://www.canada.ca/en/security-intelligence-service/corporate/csis-jobs/faq.html https://www.canada.ca/en/security-intelligence-service/corpo... > Do I have to go through the polygraph test to join CSIS? > Yes. All CSIS employees must obtain a Top Secret security clearance and the polygraph is a mandatory part of the process. Seems to be the same for CSE and to get "Enhanced Top Secret" clearance. Back to the US, the Department of Labor says that private employers can't force people to undergo a polygraph test: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/polygraph https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/polygraph But of course this does not apply to public sector jobs, where it's used more pervasively.
- heavyset_go 9mo agoThey aren't willfully ignorant, they're cheering it on.