5 ms·
My theory is that the money is actually siphoned out to black projects.
by informatimago 11y ago
My theory is that the money is actually siphoned out to black projects.
- nickpsecurity 11y agoIt could and they almost certainly do. Probably a combo of projects and profit. We have no way to test that, though, for this program. I'll note that black projects already have a way to get tons of money without much accountability: SAP's, USAP's, and waived USAP's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_access_program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_access_program I know in the 90's that Aviation Week reported that they spend around $100 million a day on these with a House committee admitted they review only 5-10% of them. So, plenty of money slushing around to who knows what. Every now and then we get details such as NSA's exploit development and subversion program costing around $212 million a year.
- engi_nerd 11y agoNot all SAPs are black. Some are publicly acknowledged.
- nickpsecurity 11y agoI forgot to add that I learned quite a bit from SAP security thanks to Uncle Sam publishing it: http://www.dss.mil/documents/odaa/nispom2006-5220.pdf http://www.dss.mil/documents/odaa/nispom2006-5220.pdf It's not the end all but it was a nice start to organizational security. Just had to... de-bureaucratize it into something a person could comprehend lol. Then worked from there based on expert writings in each subfield, spy vs spy literature, and what worked for organized crime dodging LEO's. And that's how one learns real security. :)
- nickpsecurity 11y agoYep. That's why they add "Unacknowledged" and "Waived [from extra reporting]" in front of SAP for those that are. I usually only call USAP's, esp waived, black programs in my usage. Seems most accurate, eh?