How Overclassification Makes Secrets Less Likely To Remain Secret

from the doing-it-wrong dept

There’s a really good point in a recent Washington Post article talking about how nearly 4 million people have top secret clearance in the US these days. The problem isn’t necessarily that so many people are given that clearance, but that so many people need to be given that clearance because the US government reflexively overclassifies things, meaning that basic banal office work sometimes can’t get done unless you hire “low level” people with top secret clearance:

One reason for this trend is that the U.S. government has become so reflexive about classifying information, much of which is not nearly as sensitive as an NSA spying program, that clearance are required even for totally banal work.

One effect of this classification of nearly everything, and subsequent granting of clearances to nearly everyone, is that all it takes is one or two loose cannons among those 4 million clearance-holders to spill out government secrets.

As many people have pointed out, both Ed Snowden and Bradley Manning were relatively “low level” employees, but had access to all sorts of classified materials. While some spin around and attack them, given just how many people have top secret clearance and access to these materials, it’s quite likely that this information has already spread widely — including to foreign governments. I’d much rather these things be discussed in public and via the press, than finding out later that they were just passed along to foreign governments. If the content of these classified files is really so secret and sensitive to national security, then the government needs a better way of handling that information.

As it stands, the overclassification of files leads to more people needing top secret clearance, and that means about 4 million with such clearance, including all sorts of low level employees, doing basic office work, including “packing and shipping.” And, rather than keeping that material secret, by exposing it to so many more people, this overclassification is almost guaranteeing that the content is less secret.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “How Overclassification Makes Secrets Less Likely To Remain Secret”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
19 Comments
out_of_the_blue says:

As usual, Misunderstander Mike misunderstands purpose.

Secrecy in the modern era is to be total, regardless whether effective. It’s just one aspect of the surveillance state — and not incidentally, expands “law” to cover nearly all information.

In the short term, it gives witlings the notion that they’re important, “insiders”, and so they go along. In fact, those are the most compartmentalized people, who don’t see the big picture of the surveillance state taking over. — Or even if do, are prohibited from spreading the alarm.

And so what Mike misses is that secrecy has NOTHING to do with “security”, everything to do with the expanding STATE.

The Old Man in The Sea says:

Re: Re: As usual, Misunderstander Mike misunderstands purpose.

Has anyone noticed how OOTB has been slowly progressing downhill in his writing patterns recently.

I think there is something wrong here and he may have recently suffered some kind of brain injury. If anyone knows him personally, you might want to get him to a doctor and get him checked out. Particularly getting him checked for possible stroke, it is very insidious and not necessarily noticed by the victim.

I have had some dealings with people who have suffered brain trauma and it really seems like this may have happened to him. It can be quite distressing to the person involved.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

One role of secrets is to make politicians feel important, because then then know thing that the public does not. That is why top-secret is the lowest classification of secrets, this allow the politicians to feel important without risking the stuff that really does need to be kept secret.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Not quite. There are three levels of classification and clearances.
1. Confidential – boring.
2. Secret – slightly less boring and easily attained.
3. Top Secret – more involved to attain, only gives access to Top Secret material on a need to know basis.

So Top Secret is the highest level of classification. Of course, there may be a higher, undocumented classification, but you’d have to have a Top to know about it.

Dirkmaster (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Well, actually, there are many levels ABOVE TS, most used for clarification for who has a “need to know”. So maybe it’s right to say three, but the top one is further subdivided. Many of these subdivisions have been revealed over the years (but since I can’t remember which have and haven’t, I ain’t naming any)

Or at least, that’s how it was when I was in the Navy.

Anonymous Coward says:

“including to foreign governments.”

You make the assumption the government isn’t working with foreign governments for a common cause (to further empower and enrich government and industry at public expense). These secretes aren’t designed to be kept from governments and corporate entities they are designed to be kept from the public because the public knowing about them would result in public disapproval.

Kevin L (profile) says:

Classification is outdated

One commonality between Snowden and Manning was they both had access to IT infrastructure where classified material was sent in the open. If the DoD were serious about secrets, they would develop their own Linux variant with strong, default end-to-end encryption using the already-existing PKI that covers almost every government employee. That would make it much harder for system admins to see documents they have no “need to know.” It might also reduce their reliance on extraordinarily expensive encryption hardware, which of course might not be palatable to those defense contractors.

Max Deveault (profile) says:

Relatively is a big word.

Network Admin.. low level? Go ahead and land a Network Admin without cognitive experience.

In order to do their job efficiently, they need access to things and be able to respond to say, Gen Keith Alexander who’s precious PRISM documents are not where he left them last.

Who they gonna call?

Ghost Busters? b.. please!

You don’t score a 67k avg a year job for no reason ( http://www.indeed.com/salary/q-Network-Administrator-l-United-States.html ). It’s an important job that seems to be missunderstood.

Admittedly, this position is prone to a certain code (ethics) which needs to be there or simply let the industry spy your own turf.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...