3 ms·

You have missed it, but private industry was already required to participate in governmental security policies long ago, when we began to privatize intelligence

by pekk 13y ago

You have missed it, but private industry was already required to participate in governmental security policies long ago, when we began to privatize intelligence work to companies like Booz Allen. It shouldn't be surprising that the government will make compliance to its security policies a condition of this kind of contracting. I don't see any reason to think that random maids at La Quinta in Little Rock, AR are going to need security clearances.

olefoo 13y ago
The point I was trying to make is that there are some powerful forces that will drive the expansion of "security culture" far beyond what seems reasonable to us now. The .gov has always required contractors working on sensitive matters to have clearances. But the point I'm focussing on is the broad expansion of what qualifies as "security sensitive information". And maids have physical access to rooms where people may be storing both personal, corporate and government information; it's easy to imagine someone making an argument that they should be subject to a criminal records check and possibly more stringent requirements for the luxury suites... Especially since the security process gives management extreme leverage in labor negotiations and ensures that there is an absolute power imbalance between employees and employers.