Los Alamos National Lab

OMB’s New Security Memo Suggests WikiLeaks Is Media

A number of outlets are reporting on the OMB memo requiring agencies to review their security procedures in response to WikiLeaks.

Now, this memo is explicitly a response to WikiLeaks. It’s a follow-up on a memo sent in November that names WikiLeaks.

On November 28, 2010, departments and agencies that handle classified national security information were directed to establish assessment teams to review their implementation of safeguarding procedures. (Office of Management and Budget, Memorandum M-11-06, “WikiLeaks – Mishandling of Classified Information,” November 28, 2010.)

And one of the questions it directs agencies to ask names WikiLeaks (and, in a sign of the government’s nimbleness, OpenLeaks) specifically.

Do you capture evidence of pre-employment and/or post-employment activities or participation in on-line media data mining sites like WikiLeaks or Open Leaks?

But the delay–almost six months between Bradley Manning’s arrest and the November memo, and another month until this memo, sort of reminds me of the roughly eight month delay between the time Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to set his underwear on fire and the the time a bunch of grannies started getting groped at TSA security checkpoints.

Why the delay?

And from a document usability standpoint, this list of questions designed to help agencies identify weaknesses is a piece of shit. Trust me. No matter how good a bureaucrat is, asking them to use nine pages of nested bullets to improve a process is not going to work. This is simply not a credible process improvement effort.

I also wonder why it took WikiLeaks to initiate this effort. Just as an example, Los Alamos National Labs has been losing both storage media, computers, and BlackBerries going back a decade. You’d think the vulnerability of one of our nuclear labs would alert the government to our overall vulnerability to the loss of data via computer medium. Yet losing data to–presumably–our enemies did not trigger this kind of no-nonsense vulnerability assessment, WikiLeaks did.

The Russians and the Chinese are probably bummed that WikiLeaks will make it a teeny bit harder for them to spy on us.

All that said, Steven Aftergood makes one curious observation about the memo: this unusable list of nested bullets suggests that agencies should monitor employees’ contacts with the media.

Among other troubling questions, agencies are asked:  “Are all employees required to report their contacts with the media?”  This question seems out of place since there is no existing government-wide security requirement to report “contacts with the media.”  Rather, this is a security policy that is unique to some intelligence agencies, and is not to be found in any other military or civilian agencies. Its presence here seems to reflect the new “evolutionary pressure” on the government to adopt the stricter security policies of intelligence.

“I am not aware of any such requirement” to report on media contacts, a senior government security official told Secrecy News.  But he noted that the DNI was designated as Security Executive Agent for personnel security matters in the 2008 executive order 13467.  As a result, “I suspect that an IC requirement crept in” to the OMB memo.

I agree with Aftergood: it is troubling that an intelligence community requirement now seems to be applied to the federal workforce as a whole.

But isn’t this, at the same time, rather telling?

If a memo instituting new security reviews, explicitly written in response to WikiLeaks, institutes a policy of reviewing contacts with the media, doesn’t that suggest they consider WikiLeaks to be media?

Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz Guess Holder's "ethical culture" didn't include prosecuting banksters that brought the US+world economy down. https://t.co/4t9pQjYxp9
8mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @DanLamothe: Lawyer for Navy officer accused in espionage case alleges entrapment by the FBI. https://t.co/zME3v41WNS https://t.co/zEZ3s
11mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @DonnaDiva Did I send any of that to you?? No. Yet here you are using me as a proxy for it. I like you, but that is BS.
20mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @DonnaDiva Not at all, but I am flat out accusing you of lying about it when you gratuitously apply it to me.
33mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @DonnaDiva It's got nothing to do w/her sex, is has to do with her being a disgusting politician. I may have to vote for her anyway. #Puke
34mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @DonnaDiva Because both are DLC, bought off Wall St semi-Republican assholes, additionally, Hillary is a total hammerhead warmonger.
35mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @DonnaDiva I included no misogyny whatsoever, so this is just another bullshit Clintonian slur and lie. I said Clintons plural.
36mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @DonnaDiva "Bernie Bros" was a dishonest pile of slurring scumbag shit. The Clintons can rot in fucking hell.
42mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LemonSlayerUS I listen on road trips, not around town. @joanneleon @ddayen
53mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Jeebus. Turns out Allen Dulles would have been easy to Phish. But then so would Brennan... https://t.co/t9bFcckLEm
54mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LemonSlayerUS Right; read it while working out, walking your dog, commuting, traveling. @joanneleon @ddayen
56mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LemonSlayerUS @ddayen's, in a few weeks, bc he has a great narrator. I'm reading Greg Grandin's kissinger book which is good. @joanneleon
56mreplyretweetfavorite
May 2016
S M T W T F S
« Apr    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031