US Military Leaks its Secrets Online 198
athloi writes "Detailed schematics of a military detainee holding facility in southern Iraq, geographical surveys and aerial photographs of two military airfields outside Baghdad and plans for a new fuel farm at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan are among the items accidentally left online by government agencies and contractors."
How egalitarian (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How egalitarian (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm fine with the government invading privacy just as long as they don't get to have any either.
I'm not, but it is still vaguely funny. Funny in the sense that the military is even more obsessed than the famously obsessed Federal Government (of which it is a prominent member) is with controlling information could make a mistake this stupid. Not funny in the sense that often (though not always), military secrets are secrets for good strategic or tactical reasons, and our military is at least nominally on our side. (It's like rooting for the home team. ;) )
Privacy isn't supposed to be a two-way street between a citizen and their government; symmetry of relation is inappropriate. Governments by definition are in service to the public, and act on behalf of that public; thus, there are precious few acceptable reasons why any corporeal manifestation of that government can assert a reason to keep its actions from those whom it serves, whereas a private citizen is private until and unless it gives ample reason for a public agency to believe they are doing something illegally naughty. The names almost give it away. Public Government. Private Citizen.
As a citizen, I don't want my government thinking it is in some egalitarian relationship with me and my fellow citizens. The government ought to consider itself subordinate to its citizens.
And I know this is taking your joke and dragging it unkindly into unfunny territory, but the 'you show me yours, I'll show you mine' meme is, I think, destructive to any defensible notion of privacy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, the other reason I root for the home team is I am acquainted a few of the players, and sometimes when they lose, they die. I don't want them to die, hence, I want them to win, or at least to stop playing and go home.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Point. That's why the option I *personally* favor is 'stop playing and go home'. Means both teams get to go home to play another day. But so long as they are playing...
What was that sound? That sound was the spirit of a sports metaphor dying in agony. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How egalitarian (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Its lik a L999 Firebal Mage xsept its soo far awy that its spels heel u wen they get 2 u.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
LOL! Yes, from the point of view of an uninterested observer, the US is the 'visiting' team in the 'game'. I meant 'home team' in the sense of 'team I am identified with', being as I am an American citizen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Really, feeding the enemy wrong information as the oldest trick in the book, I'd guess this and the "accidental" release of the specs for the embassy are the work of the same counter insurgency program. Ha ha, look at the stupid Americans.
Re: (Score:2)
Time to be patronising here since I am being called naive. I suspect when the above poster is old enough to join the workforce they will become aware that governments are not omnipotent and life is not a Tom Clancy novel. There's plenty of incidents in the press of ridiculous incompetance, bullying and petty infighting in agencies people hold in Godlike awe such as the FBI, let alone amateurs called in as contractors to help out when the militar
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've been studying government since you started learning code. Shit, since *I* started learning code.
P.S. Clancy is a fucking tool. And if you think all of these recent "accidental" reveals lately are real, so are you.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't know me either and if you did you may possibly call me old and out of touch instead so I can't win this silly game - I only had your writing style and rapid jumps to odd conclusions to make me jump to the conclusion that I was talking to someone with little clue - and I generously put it down to a young age and little experience. If you are old enough to join the workforce I suggest you start paying attention instead of entertaining c
Re: (Score:2)
You don't know me either and if you did you may possibly call me old and out of touch instead so I can't win this silly game - I only had your writing style and rapid jumps to odd conclusions to make me jump to the conclusion that I was talking to someone with little clue - and I generously put it down to a young age and little experience.
I recommend that before suggesting people on slashdot are young you look at their UID or even better would be their journal / homepage. It only takes a few moments to try and research what you post. Not doing so and getting caught out as obviously as you did (it tells you his uid in his post) just makes you look a bit foolish.
You cannot tell that someone with a high uid is young. However to have a uid that low means he has been a member for alot longer than me or you since they are handed out incrementally
Re: (Score:2)
I did not think that the conclusion he came to was that odd actually. I personally would rather think that governments do some things deliberately rather than think they are incompetent.
Try it both ways. I'm sure that's the correct answer, the problem is trying to deduce the proportions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How egalitarian (Score:5, Insightful)
As an active duty Marine, I completely agree with your statements on privacy, I appreciate what little privacy I enjoy and your right to privacy is one of the reasons I have served for 20+ years. I do however take issue with your comparing this instance with our current administration and congress and the military. Politicians are the government that you refer to, not those of us on the ground that are carrying out the fight. Most of us hate the politicians worse than any normal citizen, we fight, bleed etc, they get elected or re-elected based on the B.S. they can sell to the American public. There is not one single politician that has any integrity that I know of.
Heck, this administration forced me to not be a republican anymore and I will never be a democrat. They all are liars.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm reminded of the quote, "A job not worth doing is not worth doing well".
In other words, it really doesn't matter what a great job you and yours are doing. I would rather you weren't there in the first place. That is no reflection on your skills. But you have to admit
Re: (Score:2)
Here is the problem, In the battlefield right now, Men and women are dieing because people like you say pull the troops out and leave our allies hanging. Now, this might not be exactly as your saying it but it is what is being heard in the places like Iraq where people who support our tro
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that could be more illogical and separated from the point. the people doing the job are doing great jobs at it. The top of the command might be whacked out but they are doing what they consider their best too.
I think the previous poster's point was that if the leadership has gotten you into a bad situation, with impossible or actually detrimental goals, through no fault of your own, doing your job, good or bad, is making things worse in the long run, which is a good reason to dramatically change those goals. When I was in the Pentagon, the general consensus was that the military was there to clean up the mess when the diplomats screwed up. Being able to clean up the mess assumes that at some point the diplomats
Ron Paul (Score:2)
He at least believes in the truth and god traditional honesty.
Hes a fully qualified doctor too, i think he delivered 3000 babies plus so hes not a person that takes
life with a grain of salt like 5 time death defiying lord Chaney.
Re: (Score:2)
Excuse me. Between 1961 and 1990, I worked on a lot of military and government contracts as a contractor. We worked under rigorous security rules defined by the contracting agency -- the government and in most cases the military. The rules weren't always the same as those applying to military person
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of us want to do the right thing, and some of us are even smart enough to do it. Even fewer still, are given the budget and schedule by our superiors to actually accomplish that. And that's IF and ONLY IF, the *customer* can communicate a set of concise, static requirements (and then, actually commit to funding them through the lifetime of the program). Which as we know, in the whole field of IT, let alone Defense Contracting, happens all the time, right?
In
Re: (Score:2)
Work with me a minute on this. If a suspected terrorist goes to a government website, they don't have any clue who is who when checking the server logs. But, if they goto certain portions, they can narrow the field down a bit. Now, instead of searching the logs for who went where and
Re: (Score:2)
What if, for some reason, they think these plans are already available to some terrorist or not a serious threat and they placed them there in order to get IP address information from computers connecting and viewing the files.
tor [eff.org]
Work with me a minute on this.
Ok...
If a suspected terrorist goes to a government website, they don't have any clue who is who when checking the server logs. But, if they goto certain portions, they can narrow the field down a bit. Now, instead of searching the logs for who went where and then trying to associate the IP address with a customer from some ISP and then coordinate that with their Internet monitoring logs that they (no longer)need have to have a warrant to watch, they are using this stuff like this to narrow the search down a bit and look for codes as to when the next attack and may be or locations of where terrorist might be.
Interesting idea. But what about all the scavenge-hunters who will also download the plans, just because they can?
Something like this airbase, might be low on the security priority scale. They might even be old pictures and diagrams or improperly labeled in order to mislead anyone actually acting on the information. But, with the IP address of the people searching for those files combined with the Internet monitoring programs, it might make a few analyst's jobs easier to detect threats and such. Even if they are using a botnet or compromised computers, they would likely use the same bots to hide their identity when looking for orders or communications and such.
Well, if the botnet is large enough, such information might be next to useless. And then they'd have to still separate the terrorists from all the other users of the botnet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All too often you find government thinking that it's privacy rights are more important than those of the public. e.g. consider the recent cases of police officers objecting to members of the public filiming them...
Re: (Score:2)
That the reality departs from the ideal should not be a reason to abandon the ideal or give up striving for its achievement. There have been rare moments in historical governance (both in the US and elsewhere) where a government and its constituent politicians acted in service to its people rather than to itself. To make such events the rule instead of the exception should be the goal of any people. That it is the exception simply means you and I have to work harder, but the fact that it occasionally hap
Re: (Score:2)
Have you read what the founding fathers wrote?
From Federalist #51 [constitution.org]
"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."
-Madison
The whole point is for government to control the people. That was what the constitution was written for.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Way to ignore most of the sentence. Let's review:
In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men...
In other words, governments must be composed of human beings...
the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed...
Humans without some enforced public order are brutish and generally nasty. The establishment and maintenance of public peace is what the Founding Fathers (tm) meant by 'control', not manipulation, either crass or subtle,
Let's head this off at the pass... (Score:5, Informative)
From TFA: The DOD has a special category of Unclassified documents called "For Official Use Only" (FOUO) which prevents the information from being released to the public under the FOIA. This information was not classified, but was not supposed to be released.
Also from the article (Score:2)
Freeman, who showed the AP the documents from Sandia and the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command, said he made a conscious effort to avoid information labeled classified but still managed to accidentally download files from Sandia with "top secret" classifications, forcing him to wipe his computer hard drive clean and notify authorities.
Now, top secret is not suppose to be anywhere near the internet, so it could be disinformation, but I kind of think that this was a real error in handling classified material because it happens. People put things on laptops that shouldn't be there for example. So, what the AP found was unclassified, but that does not mean that classified material has not been treated this way, and the article does point this out.
--
Solar power in the wild: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar. [blogspot.com]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
as in "In the morning I will be sober but you will still be classified".
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I hope they realize that FTP does not encrypt the transport, and thus the password, and that this is only marginally better than no password at all until they bother with encrypting the underlying connection (port forwarding 21 or whatever port they are using through an SSH tunnel for example).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:okay, explain that one (Score:5, Informative)
Privacy Information, Social security numbers, medical, etc.
Company Trade Secrets
Legal documents, law enforcement documents, with limits
And there are others, some discretionary. Full definition in Chapter 4 here (~100 page PDF):
http://www.dtra.mil/documents/be/5400.7-R.pdf [dtra.mil] BUT, from Chapter 4:
C4.1.1. General. Information that has not been given a security classification pursuant to the criteria of an Executive Order, but which may be withheld from the public because disclosure would cause a foreseeable harm to an interest protected by one or more FOIA Exemptions 2 through 9 (see Chapter C3.) shall be considered as being for official use only (FOUO). No other material shall be considered FOUO and FOUO is not authorized as an anemic form of classification to protect national security interests..
OUO and the Navy (Score:2)
yeah (Score:2, Funny)
As we can see, the DOD would likely just left that information open, available over the web.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Funny thing is that Optimus Prime claimed to have learned how to speak our languages on "the World Wide Web", but he didn't once use any l337 speak.
Re: (Score:2)
"Accidently"?? (Score:5, Interesting)
That's the problem with secrets. (Score:2)
You never can tell where the lie ends and the truth starts.
Cut corners (Score:2, Troll)
Keeping secrets (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We didn't claim to invade for weapons he had in the 1980s (when he was an ally and we were PROVIDING him weapons and technical expertise). We claimed he had WMDs in the year 2003 and was refusing to get rid of them *in 2003*. Please, stop trying to move the goalposts to make yourself feel better abou
Re: (Score:2)
I am going to say this as nicely as possible: you are ignorant about the justification for the US invasion in 2003. The illegal weapons that Iraq had (and used) in the 1980s were very relevant to the 2003 invasion. Why? Because Iraq was required by a unanimous UN Security Council mandate to show the world that they had disarmed those illegal weapons and to stop using and supporting terrorism, and Iraq never complied. Not even close. To quote the
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, wow, are we already back to trying to sell the fig leaf that we invaded to defend the integrity of the UN? I thought retro took at least two decades to be cool again.
I guess next season we'll be back to the Uranium from Africa for the months-from-completion Iraqi nuclear weapon program. I need to have that dry-cleaned or I just won't be fit to be seen!
Re: (Score:2)
I simply can't conceive that you know there was a war between Iran and Iraq but don't know we supported Iraq quite openly, but I'll take your statement at face value. There's plenty of documentation [wikipedia.org] of our support of Hussein throughout the war, I don't know how in the past few years of our war you managed to miss t
Re: (Score:2)
I think you also have a misconception about exactly how much support we gave t
Re: (Score:2)
No, you just like to cherry-pick statistics that only *seem* to contradict what I actually said. I never claimed we provided them with chemical weapons, or that we were their primary direct arms supplier. Sure, we provided them with plenty of dual-use equipment, lots of cash -- we even escorted their oil to help fund the war with the US Navy!
Hell, Iraq attacked one of our own ships and killed a coupl
Re: (Score:2)
Just because conspiracy theories are "main stream" dosn't make them anything other than theories. When looked at rationally such theories stand or fall based on actual evidence, there d
It's not that simple (Score:2)
E.g., Julius Caesar was killed in the Senate after assuming dictatorial power. This appears to be a fact.
Why? Does anyone know? Why do they believe that their knowledge is fact? You can certainly accept that the written records then are no more honest than they are now, merely much sparser.
For all we know Brutus had been Caesar's lover, and was angry at him for being jilted. (Caesar is reliably reported to ha
Re: (Score:2)
The data that the ISG uncovered is beyond theory. They found and documented over a dozen hidden and proscribed weapons programs that UNMOVIC had no idea existed prior to the invasion as well as a clandestine procurement regime in place where they could get anything they wanted outside of the s
Re: (Score:2)
Further background is that the Iranians had just booted out a US backed tyrant (who was given asylum by the US). The Iraqi government (egged on by the US no doubt) decided to invade Iran over a preexisting border dispute. (Which IIRC was actually started by said US backed tyrant.
Not to mention --> After the Gulf War they we
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know where you got your facts from, but you are dead wrong. The United States did not arm Saddam's Iraq. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the US only accounted for less than 1% of th
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
This just in: (Score:2, Funny)
In other news, water is wet!
Doubt this is a mistake. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your conspiracy theory requires a greater degree of competance than is currently being displayed. Be careful with your credulity. At the far end of this scale there are those that think some elite mob of US spooks engineered 9/11 because only an omnipotent government can defeat itself.
With corruption, nepotism and political appointees you will not always get people competant enough to do the job. It's not just the head of FEMA there are small
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Drive around Arlington, VA (where the Pentagon is) and observe all the buildings with the names of defense contractors on them.
2. Say to yourself, "Everyone in all of these buildings understands that when they upload a file to the company server, it is available to anyone around the world."
3. Reflect.
Is there no way to do better? (Score:2, Insightful)
I do realize that, while everyone agrees that "security" is a good thing, it often gets treated lazily for the sake of usability. Even though I think that giving "normal" (i.e. non-system administrator) users the right to just "put things on the server" (likely via FTP or Windows Shares) is just utterly stupid in any context where some sort of security is required. Things will go wrong because people just don't realize
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I work in a class environment. I'll try to answer this.
Why should the OS care? Who is going to build
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt such an OS exists in any usable form. The problem is that not all the information in a document that is classified SECRET is in fact secret. Some is probably CONFIDENTIAL (A much lower level that does not require a full background check for access). Some is uncl
Re: (Score:2)
Notes? Lotus Notes? The same system that will consume any and all throughput availalbe to it? The same system whose search feature (pre-release 6) would commonly identify the wrong words as successful search results?
Perhaps it's only my employer's deployment
Yes - Get someone with a clue. (Score:2)
The implementation is
How to improve your security... (Score:5, Funny)
$ ftp ftp.usmilitary.com
220 FTP server (SunOS 4.1) ready.
Name (ftp.usmilitary.com): guest
331 Guest login ok, send ident as password.
Password: guest@guest.com
ftp>
Thankfully, they caught on and learned their lesson : "the SRA anonymous ftp server has been shutdown indefinitely. In the coming months, a new secure ftp site will be introduced that will replace the functionality of this site."
$sftp guest@sftp.usmilitary.com
Connecting to sftp.usmilitary.com...
Password: guest@guest.com
sftp>
Re:How to improve your security... (Score:5, Interesting)
I had the unfortunate experience of dealing with a government agency whose website was hacked. After a month-long "security audit", their in-house security experts devised a comprehensive plan to lock down their server and prevent it from ever being compromised again.
The solution, in its entirety, was to turn http://www.dumbass.agency.gov into the new, "secure" https://www.dumbass.agency.gov.
I wish I was kidding.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, like they sent some 25-year-old well-placed Republican KID who didn't know crap over to Iraq to set up their stock market, you have to wonder whether this was set up by some retarded bayou kin to somebody in "the party" who could get him the job.
Need a more secure alternative to FTP? (Score:4, Funny)
Gopher... No one looks there!
Re: (Score:2)
"accidental" my butt (Score:2)
i bet the army left them to leak in order to put more pressure on bush adm, with whom they are constantly in bickering and dislike.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
anonymous ftp? (Score:4, Funny)
Anonymous?... FTP? They may have as well put them on bitorrent and named them britneys_boobies.zip
Um, I thought we were withdrawing... (Score:2)
Stupidy and Misinformation (Score:4, Interesting)
"Leaking" disinformation would be useless if the military didn't actually leak real information. And if you do accidentally leak real information, it only makes sense to also release disinformation to create uncertainty.
But there is probably no way that layman like most of us here can determine if this is fake or real simply from the information in the article.
I had to take "software export course" - hypocrisy (Score:2)
Oblig Airplane Quote (Score:2)
Elaine Dickinson: When will you be back?
Ted Striker: I can't tell you that. It's classified.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Proxy, sir. Proxy.
At last the excuse we've been looking for to declare proxies and using proxies as illegal/treason. Thanks DoD.
- RIAA & MPAA
Solution: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course they do. The current Republican administration is making America look especially stupid and arrogant and greedy and unscrupulous to the rest of the world. If your goal was to ruin America, it's in your best interest to keep these people in charge of it. As the old phrase goes, "Give them enough rope and they will hang themselves."
I am hardly suggesting that all Republicans are stupid, arrogant, etc. (Nor am I suggesting that an
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone else notice that the threat level is ramping up right before an election year? It's as if the terrorists WANT to keep the Republicans in office. Funny how that works.
Considering any year can be categorized as either:
It seems likely that no matter when something happens, someone will assume its timing to be politically motivated.