Slashdot Mirror
Interviewing with the NSA
George Maschke writes "'Interviewing With an Intelligence Agency (or, A Funny thing Happened on the Way to Fort Meade)' is a humorous and entertaining account of one man's recent experience seeking employment with the National Security Agency (NSA). But this story, newly posted to the Federation of American Scientists website, is also one with a serious message. Written under the pseudonym 'Ralph J. Perro,' it includes discussion of the job interview, psychological testing, polygraph, and background investigation. It will be of interest to anyone contemplating employment with a federal intelligence agency."
A while back there was an opening in the CIA for an assassin. These highly classified positions are extremely difficult to fill, requiring an extensive background check, training, and testing before candidates are even considered for the position. After reviewing several applicants and completing all the checks and training, the field was narrowed to the three most promising candidates. The day came for the final test, which would determine which of equally qualified candidates, would get the job.
The final candidates consisted of two men and one woman. The men administering the test took the first candidate, a man, down a corridor to a closed door and handed him a gun saying, "We must be completely assured that you will complete your assignments and follow instructions regardless of the circumstances. Inside this room you will find your wife, seated in a chair. Take this gun and kill her." The man, looking completely shocked said, "You can't be serious! I could never kill my wife." The CIA man said, "Well, then, you're obviously not the man for the job. Take your wife and go home."
They brought the next candidate in, the other man, and repeated the instructions. This man took the gun, walked into the room and closed the door. However, after five minutes of silence, the door opened and the man handed the CIA tester the gun, saying, "I just couldn't do it. I couldn't kill my wife. I tried to pull the trigger but I just couldn't do it." The CIA man said, "Well, then, you're obviously not the man for the job. Take your wife and go home."
Then they brought the woman down the corridor to the closed door, handed her a gun, and said, "We must be completely assured that you will complete your assignments and follow instructions regardless of the circumstances. Inside this room you will find your husband, seated in a chair. Take this gun and kill him." The woman took the gun, walked into the room, and before the door closed all the way, the CIA men heard the gun start firing. One shot after another, for thirteen shots, the noise continued. Then all hell broke loose. For the next several minutes, the men heard screaming, cursing, furniture crashing and banging on the walls; then suddenly, silence. The door opened slowly and there stood the woman.
She wiped the sweat from her brow and said, "You guys didn't tell me the gun was loaded with blanks! I had to beat him to death with the chair!"
The Army reading list
Sample application question:
Which of the following words does not belong with the others?
"Federal, Intelligence, Agency"
Don't RTFA, it's a PDF...
how long until
Lie detectors are not effective. This is just being used to scare people into thinking they can't lie. I really wish more people knew more about psychology....
That's my name, and I recently interviewed for a job with the NSA. I'm sooo dead.
Ahh, I get it now. So that's why people employed in [insert government agency here] don't care about our Constitutional rights!
A friend of mine recently got a job at GCHQ, which is a bit like the British version of the NSA. You ought to see the number of forms he has to fill in... background info, more personal details than you can possibly imagine, and they're going to background check all of it. He put me down as a character reference, I might end up writing an essay about how trustworthy he is and getting inteviewed myself, and I'm not even the one applying for the frickin job!
Just wondering, but is it legal to post this sort of information? I would believe that this is classified to some sort of level, since the NSA doesn't want wannabee-feds to prepare for the (psychological-) tests. Makes sense he/she uses an pseudonym indeed, but is it really that way?
In need of reliable and affordable server monitoring?
And here's Slashdot, linking directly to a glaring example of #3. I don't know why exactly this guy decided to write up an experience and procedures which they tell you at the door are secret, but I know that the government isn't going to take too kindly to this web site giving Al Queda what is nearly a HOWTO document for infiltrating the NSA. I think we all remember the last time the Secret Service had to delete content from Slashdot. I hope the administrators have the good sense to pull this before the men with the folding uzis visit again.
If guns kill people, then CmdrTaco's keyboard misspells words.
I interviewed with the NSA for a co-op when I was in college. It went great and I wanted to work for them, but I failed the polygraph. Not once, but twice. That would be fine if I was actually lying, but I told them all the bad things I had EVER done and I still couldn't pass. It said I was lying when I answered that I hadn't been involved in espionage, taken drugs, or committed major crimes. That was my first experience of what a confessional must be like. They called me back and offered to fly me out again to try and pass the polygraph, but I passed. That experience made me lose all confidence in the supposedly all-powerful polygraph test. It's a farce and it's about as effective as reading tea-leaves.
I interviewed with the NSA. Government jobs have their advantages... In any case, as someone who wanted to get a Ph.D. and be a scientist (an now I'm about 3/4 of the way there), I decided against it because anything I ever wanted to publish after the fact would be subject to government sensors due to the clearance you must have to work for the NSA. I declined the initial offer they made (the one before they do the expensive background investigation) so I didn't go through any of the harder core testing or background checks.
When I interviewed (~1999, pre 9/11) it was pretty relaxed. None of the cloak and dagger, don't admit your are interviewing with the NSA stuff.... I pretty much called and explained I needed a flight for an NSA interview, a hotel for the interview, etc. No one ever told me not to talk about it, or keep it secret.
I did, however, sign a non-disclosure agreement that said I wouldn't talk about what I saw inside their facility (and thus I'm not), but that makes perfect sense.
Spell check? Why bother. That is what grammer/spelling Nazi freaks who waiste band width posting "spell right" are for.
That's a tough one, but I'll give it a shot. Say I'm working at N.S.A. Somebody puts a code on my desk, something nobody else can break. So I take a shot at it and maybe I break it. And I'm real happy with myself, 'cause I did my job well. But maybe that code was the location of some rebel army in North Africa or the Middle East. Once they have that location, they bomb the village where the rebels were hiding and fifteen hundred people I never had a problem with get killed. Now the politicians are sayin', "Send in the marines to secure the area" 'cause they don't give a shit. It won't be their kid over there, gettin' shot. Just like it wasn't them when their number was called, 'cause they were pullin' a tour in the National Guard. It'll be some guy from Southie takin' shrapnel in the ass. And he comes home to find that the plant he used to work at got exported to the country he just got back from. And the guy who put the shrapnel in his ass got his old job, 'cause he'll work for fifteen cents a day and no bathroom breaks. Meanwhile my buddy from Southie realizes the only reason he was over there was so we could install a government that would sell us oil at a good price. And of course the oil companies used the skirmish to scare up oil prices so they could turn a quick buck. A cute little ancillary benefit for them but it ain't helping my buddy at two-fifty a gallon. And naturally they're takin' their sweet time bringin' the oil back, and maybe even took the liberty of hiring an alcoholic skipper who likes to drink martinis and play slalom with the icebergs, and it ain't too long 'til he hits one, spills the oil and kills all the sea life in the North Atlantic. So my buddy's out of work and he can't afford to drive, so he's got to walk to the job interviews, which sucks 'cause the shrapnel in his ass is givin' him chronic hemorrhoids. And meanwhile he's starvin' 'cause every time he tries to get a bite to eat the only blue plate special they're servin' is North Atlantic scrod with Quaker State. So what do I think? I'm holdin' out for somethin' better. Why not just shoot my buddy, take his job and give it to his sworn enemy, hike up gas prices, bomb a village, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe and join the National Guard? I could be elected president.
Examine page 20.
What's wrong with this picture?
and here's a somwhat older story about the perils of applying for a security clearance from risks.d http://yarchive.net/risks/mongrel.html
Do you trust the pdf? Why is it a pdf? Is Adobe in league with the NSA? could the acroread you installed to replace the KGhostgview default KDE PDF reader because "the rendering is better" be backdooring your linux box right now, after you were insufficiently paranoid by clicking on the pdf link? Oh you fool. You fool. You're not even wearing your tinfoil hat to stop Scalar/Longitudinal EM wave interference with your brain!
Choice of masters is not freedom.
The extensive psychological testing of NSA would-be employees is a Good Idea. Remember that the major security leaks from the Mannhattan Project were government scientists who decided that it was their duty to humanity to hand nuclear secrets over to the communists. (We now know exactly who the commie spies were thanks to the declassification of old Soviet Union documents... None of the people McCarthy accused were on the list, but multiple scientists from Los Alamos were.)
They had contacted him, which was interesting, for I believe a "Field Op" position... but anyways, he didn't tell me much about it, but one of the questions they asked him, when hooked up to the lie detector was:
"Have you ever inserted your finger into your asshole for pleasure?"
The guy was straight faced and did not even show the slightest sign of thinking this question was odd or funny.
A couple other things he mentioned where much much interesting than that... but I don't know, after hearing it I haven't ever mentioned it to anyone (not even my wife)
Casual Games/Downloads
I think all articles from now on should carry a PDF warning, akin to the NYT registration warning.
@#@#$@ PDF plugin crashed Moz.
Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
The Handwritten Questionnaire
The handwritten questionnaire asks for a lot of information already supplied on the security forms, such as:
Name, age, education, marital status, children (if any), etc.
The more interesting questions were (as best I can recall):
- Describe the relationship to your mother
- Describe the relationship to your father
- Describe your parent's relationship to each other
- Have you ever had psychological counseling? (when/how long, etc.)
- Have any relatives ever had psychological counseling?
- Have you ever attempted suicide?
- Have you ever had a substance abuse problem?
- Do you drink? If so, how many drinks per week? per day?
- When was the first time you drank alcohol?
- Have you ever had interpersonal issues at work? (e.g., work relationships)
- Have you ever had disciplinary issues at school/military?
- Have you ever been convicted of a misdemeanor/felony?
- Have you ever been questioned by the police/authorities? (N.B., this would appear to be the catch-all, in case
someone wasn't convicted)
- Do you have any relatives that were in trouble with police/authorities?
- Have you ever taken something that was not yours? (This may have been worded as something slightly different.
but this was the intent)
- Have you ever committed computer abuse? (N.B.: whether deliberate or not, I recall the term 'abuse' being left
unspecified, ostensibly leaving the door open for all sorts of self-reporting ranging from checking personal email at
work, to having used Napster/Morpheus etc., to writing viruses, hacking websites and stealing credit cards
numbers.)
- Have you ever been the victim of a violent crime?
- Have you ever clucked like a chicken? If so, did you scratch backward or frontward?
- Describe your relationships to chickens.
The last page had about 20 sentences for the applicant to complete. Some that I remember were...
- Men should ____
- Women should ____
- I get angry when/because ____
- Chickens should ___
Given the theme, I would hazard a guess that the other sentences were ones that touched on potentially strong
emotional reactions like "I most regret," "If I only could", "I won't" and things like that.
The Computerized Test
As close as I can remember, these were some of the actual questions on the test. (true/false)
- I would like the job of a forest ranger
- I hear voices in my head
- I read the crime reports in the newspaper
- I have a mortal fear of earthquakes
- I have neck/hand pain
- I usually know what's going on (with my circle of friends)
- People are out to get me
- I would like the job of a librarian/florist (I can't remember which one it was, and it might have been both)
- I often feel that I can't get out of bed
- If someone has their possessions stolen from their unlocked car they had it coming.
- I like/enjoy children
"Animal-relationship"-type questions (e.g., "I enjoy animals", "I don't enjoy animals", "I like hurting animals", "It
bothers me when I hear about animals getting hurt" etc.)
- I am totally insane and like to stand on tables and cluck like a chicken
A few previous questions might not have actually been on the exam or the handwritten portion, but you get the
point. The questions went on and on.
Anyone who has been in the US military in either the Nuke or Cryptology program is familiar with the drill. They also have the best shots at openings as much of the background investigation is already done.
I know, been there, done that. It's where I got my electronics background.
The truth shall set you free!
Gosh. *THE* top intelligence agency in the world is careful about who they hire. Thanks for the newsflash "Ralph".
I went through the same thing for my job, and it was pretty easy and straightforward. Polygraphs are actually very simple conceptually in what they are trying to detect. Sometimes there are faults, but that's why they retake them.
My neighbors thought it was sort of cool that my job required such scrutiny. I messed with one guys head, when he asked me what I did, I looked carefully into the sky for several moments before saying "Oh, can't talk about it now" and then glancing up in the sky again. :-)
But the Federation of American Scientists is a heavily ideological outfit, so what can you expect?
--- Ban humanity.
Many years ago when I interviewed with them, they had a large (LED) marquee style sign hanging from the ceiling of a corridor that read "When you use the red phone -- the enemy listens". I asked one of the interviewers about it, and he was noncommittal and vaguely embarrassed. They also had beer in the cafeteria vending machine. I was applying for a summer job (while in college) and they were still investigating me in mid-summer. I ended up working elsewhere.
""Have you ever inserted your finger into your asshole for pleasure?""
The Goatse.cx guy interviewed for the CIA? Wow!
"Presidents can snort coke, sleep with subordinates and be alcoholics."
who are we talking about here? Clinton or JFK?
Write an essay, that is. They send someone round to interview you.
(No, I don't work for them. Yes, I gave a reference.)
A friend of mine from India was recently trying to decide between two jobs, one with the US Government and one in the private sector. He was leaning toward the government job, because he enjoyed the work more, until he talked to a collegue who had just joined the NSA. She told us how the agency required her to report all of her international friends, and keep tabs on their meetings. She had to get special permission to travel abroad. He decided, on the spot, to take the job at the private company.
-- Give us your technology and we'll give you all the cow lips you want.
You know that an "oxymoron" actually means "oversimplified commentary utter by a moron", right?
But don't worry. The fine men and women who work in this nation's intelligence community really don't give a picoliter of gnat urine what you think.
here's the interesting (or frightening) part. two weeks before he left for his new job, i had to send a bunch o sensitive data to some management type. so i called up our spook-to-be and said "point me to yr public key so i can send you this data pgp'd and yout can pass it on." his response?
"i don't have a public key. that cryptography stuff is a waste of time."
good luck national security association in all your future endeavors!
2 1337 4 u!
Please provide attribution, Will.
NSA: "Sir, have you at any time read or posted to Slashdot."
Interviewee: "Well, yes, I have."
NSA: "Arrest this man."
----
"Ours was a free culture. It is becoming much less so."-Lawrence Lessig
If they do manage to infiltrate the NSA, at least you can sleep at night knowing *somebody* at the NSA knows what al-Qaeda is up to.
One you take the Home Front Pledge, then we can answer your question.
Yeah, right.
my guess is GWB, Clinton, and ??? (in that order)
I don't always agree with Jakob "butt ugly, but look how useful" Nielsen, but on direct linking to PDFs the man's got a point. What's next? an article about the flexibility of various body holes, linked to the site which ruined the whole .cx TLD?
(this is not flamebait, nor trolling.. Maybe off-topic..)
I do not see what the problem is. When you work for any government intelligence agency in the world, there will be a great deal of secrecy and many things that do not make sense. All countries want to protect themselves (not just the USA). If there is a problem with allowing an employer to delve into your private life, an intelligence agency is certainly not the way to go. Most small commercial sector companies don't care what you do in your free time, as long as you show up to work.
There are enough features in the first four pages to identify who it is. It'd be flat out simple with the combination of "who came in really early" and "who missed their flight that we paid for"
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
The article said: "After the process was over, I was talking to one of my references - a veteran Silicon Valley software executive, and former manager of mine. My reference commented on what transpired "That's disappointing. If they can't hire you, I have no idea who they can hire. That process seems to be designed to retain only the most bland." This is VERY TRUE A quasi-good friend of mine is in the NSA. He doesn't drink (maybe 8 beers in his life) has never been drunk, no drugs, lived with parents for 3 years after college, parents do well financially (not rich, not poor), father was a state trooper (parents never divorced), only one sister (small, tight knit family), had never left the United States (except to Canada... once), commuted to college (lived at home), received good grades 3.8+, graduated in the top 3% of his high school class, religious, comes from a small town, well rounded (played sports, basketball coach for teens... I'm also sure he had an amazing credit history and glowing reviews from previous employers. Why would the NSA want to hire qualified people that may be a security risk when they can simply hire people 2-3 years out of college from the middle of nowhere and train them the way that they want them to be trained. What's more risky, someone that is 100% loyal and quasi-qualified or someone that is 100% qualified, but potentially a security risk. They also may have been stringing this guy along to see if he was an agent for another country. (PS, I sure hope they wouldn't hire someone that has the potential to post a 13 page auto-biography and post it on the net!)
Would you ever post sensitive documents on the internet?
The process is quite dramatic according to the author. In reality, the process of being hired to the intelligence agencies is fairly simple. This is, of course, as long as your life has no skeletons in your closet. If anyone is interested in working for them, be prepared for a very intrusive interview.
There are relatively few things that disqualify you compared to what they ask you. The purpose of most of the questions and polygraph is that they get full disclosure of what you have done. They need to know all the skeletons in your closet, so they can't be used as blackmail against you.
Espionage often starts very simple. One instance I was told about was about a civilian consultant who asked a military person to buy them cigarettes at the Post Exchange (to avoid taxes). They worked together and the soldier didn't see anything wrong with helping the guy out. More purchases were made with the soldier accepting cash kickbacks on the savings.
This was used as leverage to get him to give them some information. The soldier thought the info was harmless and that this would get him out of it but really he was just more involved. From there it can just get worse and worse and he has more to hide.
The NSA doesn't really care that you tried pot 6 years ago as long as you're not trying to hide that fact. Someone that wants that fact hidden is a prime candidate for getting started down that slippery slope. It would probably start with something harmless, "Tell me what time so-and-so gets to work or I'll tell your entire church you smoked dope." If you're a neurotic person that needs to hide your past actions and pretend you were always the law-abiding, church goer that you are now then that may be perceived as a real threat that you'd go for.
t
The article said:
"After the process was over, I was talking to one of my references - a veteran Silicon Valley software executive, and former manager of mine. My reference commented on what transpired "That's disappointing. If they can't hire you, I have no idea who they can hire. That process seems to be designed to retain only the most bland."
This is VERY TRUE
A quasi-good friend of mine is in the NSA. He doesn't drink (maybe 8 beers in his life) has never been drunk, no drugs, lived with parents for 3 years after college, parents do well financially (not rich, not poor), father was a state trooper (parents never divorced), only one sister (small, tight knit family), had never left the United States (except to Canada... once), commuted to college (lived at home), received good grades 3.8+, graduated in the top 3% of his high school class, religious, comes from a small town, well rounded (played sports, basketball coach for teens...
I'm also sure he had an amazing credit history and glowing reviews from previous employers.
Why would the NSA want to hire qualified people that may be a security risk when they can simply hire people 2-3 years out of college from the middle of nowhere and train them the way that they want them to be trained.
What's more risky, someone that is 100% loyal and quasi-qualified or someone that is 100% qualified, but potentially a security risk.
They also may have been stringing this guy along to see if he was an agent for another country.
(PS, I sure hope they wouldn't hire someone that has the potential to post a 13 page auto-biography and post it on the net!)
WILL: Say I'm working at N.S.A. Somebody puts a code on my desk, something nobody else can break. So I take a shot at it and maybe I break it. And I'm real happy with myself, 'cause I did my job well. But maybe that code was the location of some rebel army in North Africa or the Middle East. Once they have that location, they bomb the village where the rebels were hiding and fifteen hundred people I never had a problem with get killed.
(rapid fire)
Now the politicians are sayin' "send in the Marines to secure the area" 'cause they don't give a shit. It won't be their kid over there, gettin' shot. Just like it wasn't them when their number got called, 'cause they were pullin' a tour in the National Guard. It'll be some guy from Southie takin' shrapnel in the ass. And he comes home to find that the plant he used to work at got exported to the country he just got back from. And the guy who put the shrapnel in his ass got his old job, 'cause he'll work for fifteen cents a day and no bathroom breaks. Meanwhile my buddy from Southie realizes the only reason he was over there was so we could install a government that would sell us oil at a good price. And of course the oil companies used the skirmish to scare up oil prices so they could turn a quick buck. A cute, little ancillary benefit for them but it ain't helping my buddy at two-fifty a gallon. And naturally they're takin' their sweet time bringin' the oil back and maybe even took the liberty of hiring an alcoholic skipper who likes to drink seven and sevens and play slalom with the icebergs and it ain't too long 'til he hits one, spills the oil, and kills all the sea-life in the North Atlantic. So my buddy's out of work and he can't afford to drive so he's got to walk to the job interviews which sucks 'cause the shrapnel in his ass is givin' him chronic hemorrhoids. And meanwhile he's starvin' 'cause every time he tries to get a bite to eat the only blue-plate special they're servin' is North Atlantic scrod with Quaker State.
(A beat.)
WILL (cont'd): So what'd I think? I'm holdin' out for somethin' better. I figure I'll eliminate the middle man. Why not just shoot my buddy, take his job and give it to his sworn enemy, hike up gas prices, bomb a village, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe and join the National Guard? Christ, I could be elected President.
BH
Fools! They laughed at me at the Sorbonne...!
Warding off a sermon, I will say that if you are going in for the [IMO] noble reasons of serving your fellow man and improving life for all then ensure that your job would actually provide that. Avoid "in name" jobs and "in name" people. Heed the real lesson of tempering idealism with pragmatism and logical, long term action. However, ignore those who would only try to appear as pragmatic and logical just to cover-up their base natures. Those who snub someone so easily because they see them as "over eager" might themselves be nothing more than Dilbert's PHB when furrowing his brow and scratching his chin. (btw, do NOT like Dilbert actually comment that "Gee, when you do that it gives the appearance that you are thinking!")
On the other hand, ignore those who have obvious hate and distrust of cops and military. I distrust government like I distrust a wild predator. I will not however lump all animals into the same boat like so many think that ALL cops are pigs and ALL military members are ego-retarded monkeys.
That said, I see no reason to ever support the NSA. What sounded good once on paper has proven to be yet another bloated and confused package of expensive corruption.
So how in the world did that bunch of terrorists from SD6 get posh jobs in the CIA if government security jobs are this hard to get into?
one thing mentioned in the article is Robert Hanssen, an FBI agent who secretly sold secrets to the former Soviet GRU and KGB agencies, and the now Russian SVR agency. I forget the title and author, but there is a very good book I've read about the man's second life.
also mentioned is that no polygraph has ever caught a spy. I find that particularly interesting because one thing Hanssen did while an FBI agent in the counter-intelligence division (the dept responsible for catching spies, including himself) was recommend against the use of the polygraph as a screening device for new agents. Even so, Hansen appears to be the type of person a poly wouldnt catch anyway, since some psychologists believe he may be completely bi-polar given the long succcess (20+ years) he had in leading his double- (at one point triple) life.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
I always wondered why they asked this question. Then I did a google search, saw the number of results, and now I see why:
% 22 +psychological
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22forest+ranger
Can anyone explain the obsession the NSA seems to have with chickens? Or did the author just stick those in as a joke?
The test he's talking about in the article is called the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) II. It consists of 567 true/false questions (the original had 566). As you might suspect, it takes a while to answer them all.
The test is very thorough. The scoring process includes statistical analyses to determine how much you're lying and whether you're trying to "fake good" or "fake bad". There are also a large number of scales that report how likely you are to be an alcoholic, have some kind of schizotypal personality disorder or depression, levels of anxious/antisocial/obsessive behavior, etc., etc.
bytesmythe
Hypocrisy is the resin that holds the plywood of society together.
-- Scott Meyer
I was buying this BS until he said that he bought a k car, no one with any intelligence buys a k car.
with what this person has said. I too went for an interview with one of our intelligence agencies and the process he describes is spot on.
I went through the 10+ page background information packet and even had to ask my dad for his naturalized citizen number! I couldn't explain why other than to say, "I need it for a form I'm filling out."
I drove down to the interview location and was told in my pre-interview packet to avoid urinating in the morning before I came down as there would be a urinalysis test. Let me tell you, it's darn near impossible not to take a piss in the morning even if you don't have anything to drink later than 8 pm the previous night.
I did stop on the way down because I knew I wouldn't make it but drank a load of water to hopefully help compensate. (not like I had any worry about what they might find mind you).
The tests on the first day were urinalysis, blood test, sight test, hearing test and after lunch the big one, polygraph. We got to watch a short video about how a polygraph works and what to expect and then one-by-one we were taken to a room for our exam.
The first of my two polygraphs was given by a woma who was polite but professional. We went over the questions she was going to ask so there was no confusion as to whether I understood them or not. In some cases where clarification was needed I wrote down why I was going to say what I eventually said. In my case a relative was working for the federal government and I did have a relative who was not a native-born or naturalized citizen.
While most people are anxious when taking a polygraph I can tell you I was completely bored and almost fell asleep a few times during the questioning. I had to fight to stay awake and resorted to looking at different spots on the wall in front of me.
The two funniest parts of the whole situation were these: initially when she asked me baselining questions she told me I had given excellent responses. Exactly what she needed. Then, after the round of questions was over she walked in front of me and told me, "You're lying. These are the worst readings I've ever seen from anyone."
I had to really fight not to smirk, smile or laugh and finally ended up saying I don't know what she's reading but I answered everything truthfully. She said she'd let me alone for a while to "think over what I had said" and walked out of the room. What did I do? I closed my eyes and rested myself.
When she came back in the second funny thing happened. As she standing there with a cup of coffee in her hand she proceeds to tell me I'm lying again, all the while she's yawning her head off. Again I had to force back a smile and repeated that I was truthful in my answers.
She gave a second round of questions (I was able to stay awake more easily) and was once again told I was giving bad readings. Thus endeth my first day.
The second day was composed of my second polygraph, a booklet of questions (Do you care what happens to yourself?) and finally the meeting with the psych doc.
My second polygraph was with a man who was slightly more pleasant to deal with who, when asking me how things went the previous day, was told, "Apparently I gave the worse readings the previous examiner had ever seen".
We went through the same process of reading over the questions beforehand and then answering. At one point late in the process he asked, "What are you doing?"
I was puzzled and asked what he meant and once again was told I was giving bad readings. I certainly wasn't nervous though I was very relaxed. He came over and adjusted the blood pressure sleeve on my arm (I have small upper arms) and back we went with the questioning.
The only real difference between the second exam and the first was that in the second exam I could see the two-way mirror to my right at about the 1 o'clock position (so obviously was being watched) whereas on the first day it was behind me.
At the end of the second exam the examiner st
Well, considering this guy divulged details of the interview process that were not doubt not supposed to be divulged, he was obviously not suited to the job. No wonder they denied him.
The author alludes to the part about the chickens being a joke.
George W. Maschke
AntiPolygraph.org
This comment is printed on 100% recycled electrons.
when I applied for a Top Secret clearance for Marine Corps Intelligence(I've heard the jokes, don't bother)... they asked if I fucked chickens. In those words.
And the paperwork... fun fun fun. For a while I had the job of validating the forms, thankfully there is a computer program to do all that.
Then when they find your friends/former friends/former coworkers (who you didn't list on the PSQ), etc., you better hope they are honest with the Special Agents of the various investigating organization.
Mine where NOT.
(mistake 2, even caring)
Posted annoymously (from an NSA approved "irreputable character")
Bite down on your tongue (most effective) or otherwise inflict pain onto an area of your body. This will redirect the stress response away from the lie detector. You can also do this to avoid getting stung by bees/wasps/hornets as they can actually 'smell' fear or stress and subsequently feel threatened themselves - thus attacking you. This could be very handy in a police-state. Those who need it will remember it.
They can (and I'm sure they DO) make you sign confidentiality agreements as a part of the application process that make you liable in some way for revealing the particulars of the exams. They can probably prosecute you if you break them, but don't bother unless you publish a detailed book or something. Do you really want to be facing a federal crime?
I was in the USAF from 1977 to 1982 in the Electronic Security Command (nee Security Service and called something else now). Though we were technically DOD personnel, all of our tasking came through the NSA and that's who we reported to and through to other agencies. My last station was at Fort Meade. Life was exciting working the Soviet problem from northern Japan and later China, Vietnam and parts of the Indian Ocean from the Philippines.
Without going into specifics, I'll say that their methods of checking someone out were very thorough. They didn't bother with polygraphs because they know as well as anyone how unreliable they are. But a highschool friend's dad happened to be an investigator who did part of my background check and the amount of crap they dug up was astounding. Some of it was stuff that I didn't know about myself before then.
Looking back, I'm almost surprised that I got the TS/SCI clearance based on their criteria (special compartmented intelligence is only one step below 'eyes only' and strictly 'need to know'). But nearly all of us took our work and the need to keep secrets very seriously. 'Gig talk' in a bar would cost you a round.
Things that make me wonder: "Wouldn't it be cool if X were run by the Slashdot community?"
Where X equals any of: USPTO, RIAA, MSFT, NSA, SCO, Natalie Portmans Hot Grits Mix , Matrix plot/storyline continuity, SciFi Channel...
What is the deal with people on slashdot not wanting to read PDF files? Why do we need warnings that a link is to a PDF?
It's certainly not about standards compliance (Slashdot generating incompliant HTML 3.2 code anyone?) And, it's not about supporting patent encumbered file formats (GIF instead of PNG, multiple articles on MP3 players)
So tell me, honestly. Why do people have such a hard time with PDFs?
Overrated / Underrated : Moderation
As someone pointed out to a previous poster with a similar comment:
FBI: Federal Bureau of Investigation
CIA: Central Intelligence Agency
NSA: No Such^W^WNational Security Agency
Pionar intelligence would be an oxymoron, or just a plain moron.
Norris/Palin 2012
Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
The "Analysys" section of that NSA interview document is definitely interesting, sort-of playing on the "AH HA! Made you look!" way of getting info out of people. Has anyone had similar experiences with lie detectors (that they're willing to admit)?
Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
...seeing his tendency to reveal confidential material, I can understand why they rejected him ;-P
:)
Seriously, a great read. I had to laugh out loud many times
Speaking from experience, it really is something. My application to the NSA occured when I was significantly younger than this gentleman (senior year of high school), so I didn't get asked questions like "do you engage in wife swapping." But I did have to go through the background check, the interviews, the polygraph (which I failed on the first attempt, for reasons still unclear, but passed on the second. I've heard of people taking up to 7 tries to pass (and still getting the job)).
... only to find out later in the summer that the number of slots available shrank and I was out.
My story ends in being told, just before graduating, that I was in consideration for the position, and likely to get it
Yes, what fun.
..the ones I had while interviewing for developer position at Six Flags few years back. Go figure.
My wife has been interviewed multiple times by the feds as some of her friends applied for jobs in the Justice Department. The above comment is exactly right. "Experimentation" with recreational drugs, and lots of other "bad acts" are not automatic disqualifications. Deceit is a definite disqualification.
We have one friend who was convicted of a felony count of child abuse and still got a job working in the field for the FBI. She had been either shot or stabbed (I can't recall) by a minor during a robbery. The (brilliant) judge sentenced the minor to counseling and she was required to go to one of these counseling sessions and describe to the perp how she felt being attacked. The kid laughed in her face, at which point she took off her shoe, lept accross the table, and started beating him with the shoe. This resulted in here being convicted of child abuse. The FBI agent doing the interview actually laughed at the circumstances.
Current lie detectors don't work very well. http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2002/11/ma _148_01.html
6 1777/p1/article.jhtml
But new generation lie detectors will presumably be based on fMRI technologies that allow the interviewer to directly look into the applicant's brain in real time. Different centers are necessarily activated to lie and this difference is distinguishable. http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m1175/1_35/822
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
It's obvious that the author of this paper should not have been hired by the NSA, since he feels perfectly ok about doing a write up on the hiring practices of one of the world's leading intel agencies. He obviously considers National Security to be a game, and of no real importance. It's nice to see that the NSA can still weed out the assholes and morons like this guy.
Loose lips....
Keep Austin Weird!
A long time ago as I graduated from college I had exactly 2 job offers, one from Mitsubishi and one from the US DOD. Now being 6'6" and the Mitsubishi job was 50% travel to Japan, I feared that I was a gaijin as they come and that I wouldn't survive as business class hotel occupant, I took the DOD job. So I began the waiting for all the clearance paperwork and process to start and clear. At least at this time you could begin working on unclass stuff while waiting for the background investigation and all the other stuff. I never had to do a polygraph, but I did have the security interview. I was 23 at the time and had grown up in a pretty conservative, Christian midwestern household (e.g. church on Sunday, I was an Eagle Scout, no trouble with the law except a speeding ticket etc.). To the government spooks this screamed plant - They asked me repeatedly if I had used drugs (nope), Are you sure? You can tell us it's ok?, Have you ever had an extramartial affair? (I was single at the time) Do you have deviant sexual habits etc etc. Answering those questions truthfully just increased their skepticism. Eventually it was over and I went back to working on my unclassified work (which tended to be keeping myself busy with make work and crossword puzzles). They were also very concerned that I had gone to E & W Germany, Austria and Czechoslakia on a high school german club trip. Three months later they granted my clearence. The work was completely unintersting (and they couldn't tell me much about the job during the interview since it was all classified). Within a year I had found a better job in the private sector and never looked back. I believe part of the reason the job was classified was so they could hide the costs in a budget. The total cost to the US taxpayer was approx $75k for my salary and background check costs. The applicant is better off getting denied a clearance.
"They need to know all the skeletons in your closet, so they can't be used as blackmail against you."
Maybe the reason they want to hear all the skeletons in your closet is so that they have 'insurance' of your loyalty. Maybe the reason the more honest people never 'pass' the polygraph test is that they don't reveal any information that the NSA could blackmail you with themselves, thereby insuring your loyalty.
Just wondering.
Is it just me, or did this guy just write a 21-page document rationalizing the fact that he did not get the job? Yes, he does sound defensive.
I applied for a position with the US State Dept(feeling adventurous? They have openings!) and got a CPO (Conditional position offer). They didn't have polygraphs, but they did do most of the rest of the deal, interviewing all your friends and neighbors from everywhere you lived the past 7-10 years. Bizzaro this is, the position was working on computer systems in embassies overseas. Lots of travel, hey, I've ALWAYS loved traveling to foreign countries and learning the languages and such. Bzzzt. Penalty. Strangely enough, people who have spent long periods of time overseas and could handle traveling alone to god-knows-where on a moment's notice are the ones who have the most difficulty getting through the security exam. (I had lived in Germany, Russia and China before that) They really want people who have never left their hometown, and have had the same friends and neighbors for the past 20 years. Two things really tripped me up: Credit report (clean it up BEFORE considering applying) and possibly my at the time fiancee who was chinese. Whoops. Well, they declined. But that took TWO YEARS to make a final decision.
Interestingly, if you've ever been through the process, you can get all the paperwork they did on you through the Freedom of Information Act. Takes FOREVER thought. I got all my FoIA documents about two years after they declined me. The most interesting part of the whole escapade? In my file, among all the interview transcripts, there was a standard form (agency, location, what was reported, blah blah blah) that was COMPLETELY redacted. Talk about a freakout. What was it they know that I'm not allowed to know?!? Someday after the heebie-jeebies wear off, I think I'll frame that page and put it on my office wall.
"NSA is now funding research not only in cryptography, but in all areas of advanced mathematics. If you'd like a circular describing these new research opportunities, just pick up your phone, call your mother, and ask for one."
You're right, there is no Federal Intelligence Agency. However, if you had read the story, the last 3 words are what i put. So read before you respond.
This Is The Most Important Question On This Test! (T/F)
Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
"a friend of mine from India" + "US government job" = Gov will trust you about as far as they can throw you on Jupiter.
That's just common sense stereotyping.
They aren't so much keeping tabs on the people she is meeting with, but instead on her.
-Malakai
A Dragon Lives in my Garage
My father once told me about a crew member he flew with in the U.S Air Force.
Note: My father was a Navigator on some of the "Looking Glass" flights during Vietnam.
Seems the man was up for promotion and needed to go through a background security check to get his grade increase. After filling out the stack of forms and giving the addresses of every relative, he sat back and waited for final approval and clearence.
After three months of no word, and finding that his C.O. was told to ground him until further notice, he felt he needed to call around to his relatives to find out what the problems were and to find out what, if anything was said.
Being from a very small town in the back hills country of the Ozarks, it took a little while to locate the troubles and find out what went wrong. The man finally got in touch with his own father and asked if Air Force Security had sent someone out to interview them. His father replied, "Yep. Them revenuers been sniffin 'round here askin all sorts of questions 'bout you. But don't worry none. We didn't tell them nothin!"
It took about an hour to straighten out his father and after asking his C.O. to re-submit the paperwork, he got his promotion in about a month.
-Goran
Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
The Everything Graph would be called a pangraph, not just a polygraph...
A. "Agent Smith? Something you might be interested in . . . "
B. "I see. Would you classify yourself as l33t?"
C. "Really? Ya know, my PC has been acting really funny these days . . ."
D. "Shoot him, he has no life anyway."
----
"Ours was a free culture. It is becoming much less so."-Lawrence Lessig
'omni-' means everything
'pan-' means everything-wide, (or sth like that)
#include "coucou.h"
ZSCURGHVKCSMFJA
end...
When I was a senior in college in the early '80s (yes Im a fossil, get over it :-)) I interviewiewed with the NSA. It sounds like things haven't changed much. You first interviewed at the college (WPI in my case) and then they'd bring you down to Maryland for 2 days at some later point if someone found you interesting. You arrived at BWI and were picked up with a bunch of other college seniors by a gent in a van who was pretty clearly ex military (not a lot of folks with wicked short haircuts and that classic bodybuilder look in the early '80s). Everyone was taken to a hotel in Columbia Maryland. The first day was almost totally tests, the MMI (Michigan Multiphasic Indicator, the paper ancestor to the 500 question computer test), the same stupid questions about parents, and the interview with a psycholgist. Then some interviews at sites where people who were interested you interviewed you. This was almost the same as my interviews at Wang, DEC, Data General etc. but for one little difference. To get to the interviewers desk we had to go through an area where people were working on stuff that required clearance. The guy found a another person in the hall and had them stay with me. Then he went in and you could hear him saying, "Uncleared person coming through". He then came out and got me, as we walked through it cold be seen that most of the desks were clear of papers and the VT-100 clone terminals on a couple of the desks were powered off. Leaving 20 minutes later was a similar process. The second day was at FANNEX in Baltimore this had the dreaded polygraph. It was sureal to say the least. In the application you had to state what experiences you had had with illegal drugs. Unlike a recent president I had inhaled, and had listed my assorted miscreant behavior on the forms (actually needing a seperate sheet). This got me throuroughly questioned on the polygraph. Last thing was having finger prints done as part of the security clearance. I had worked a couple summers in delis and had (and have) a rather distinctinve scar on my left index finger from a cut cleaning a slicer. The young woman (20's?) in a naval uniform that took the prints looked at my left hand prints and said jokingly, "Don't commit any crimes or if you do don't do it left handed, they'll pick you up in a flash...". That was the only bit of humor (besides interacting with fellow interviewees) in the whole trip. Reading the paper it doesn't sound like they've changed much even the polygraph chair sounded familiar. The whole experience left me wanting to sing the chorus of "Alice's Restaurant" on the way out (and see if I couldn't coax it out of some of the others). Never did get an offer, but I can't say I'm disappointed now some 20 years later.
Just a thought but it seems to me they may have made the correct assessment. After his interview he seems to feel it's correct and necessary to divulge the entire hiring process for the world to see, after he's been told not too, that it's at least confidential if not a secret process (for proper reasons I imagine). I'm assuming he's done this out of anger or bitterness that he didn't pass. There was more than once his tone seemed to take that spin. Nevertheless, whatever his reason(s) for telling everyone, in my mind, they made a good call keeping him away from the real secrets. I'm in no way a flag waving zelot but I'm going to have side with the NSA on this one. -[d]-
There have been some changes since the 1970s. My instructions said that I would be "picked up by a military vehicle" at the hotel, and an olive-drab bus showed up promptly on schedule. None of my paperwork said NSA on it; my expense check came from a fake furniture company. Those were the No Such Agency days, when NSA denied they even existed.
Unlike this guy, I was invited to visit NSA headquarters at Fort Meade. This was intimidating. Triple fences all around the facility, the middle one electrified. The guards were U.S. Marines. Lots of them. Some searching people going in and out, some standing at attention along halls, some at corridor intersections. Combination locks on doors. Picture badges with the picture anodized into aluminum. Badge-exchange checkpoints (identity check, turn in outside badge, get inside badge).
As it turned out, I got a low draft lottery number and was drafted into the Army, so I didn't end up working there.
NSA's real problem today is that it was build to deal with the Cold War. The USSR was a very slow-moving threat, but secretive, and vast efforts were needed just to find out basic stuff, like how many aircraft they had and whether they really had a titanium submarine. Much NSA and CIA effort was devoted to finding out capabilities. Today, the intelligence community faces quite different problems, like a sudden need for information about specific people in Afghanistan or Bosnia. NSA has had major problems with the transition.
Since you obviously didn't care enough about the job to even pretend to take things seriously (even if they were nonsense), why would you expect to be hired? It's like a job interview; when I'm interviewing someone, we both know that interviews are ridiculous, but that doesn't mean that they can be flippant.
This guy would have been a real asset to the government, really. His presentation is great, he has these great tables that illustrate exactly what he's trying to say, and they're also really funny.
Plus, he's got a good eye, a pretty developed sense of humor, and a lot of creativity. An outside-the-box thinker, maybe.
But our government is more concerned with "safe" than "good." "Safe" people don't rock the boat and destroy pension opportunities.
Wow, this article has come up at an all too convenient time of my life. I am in the process of employment screening with a major defense contractor of the US. I have recently been looking up information on secret clearance (not top secret) grants and declines. It's very interesting and although to get a secret clearance a polygraph is not required all of this information has proven helpful but confusing. To lie or not to lie 'tis the question! Hopefully I won't be hooked up to the hot seat per-se. :) Anybody have any experience with secret clearance process???
The "foreign interests" questions must have been crucial for the examiner, and what ultimately caused the rejection. After all, if he passed the other tests and reached the personal interview in the Cadillac, what happened there must be the reason for the "fail" mark. It makes me think that, if an applicant has frequently traveled to the Middle East, or has family ties to Muslim countries in the region, or knows Arabic/Persian/Afghan, or simply has an interest in the culture and mentality of these people, there is precious little chance he/she will pass the test.
Are you surprised then that the NSA and CIA can not prevent terrorist attacks on American targets at home and abroad? Acres of computers are no substitute for insider knowledge. WMD in Iraq? Mobile laboratories for nerve gas? The bombed, embargoed, Third World country couldn't feed and provide medical care for its children, for Christ! Is NSA clueless?
Or, does it produce whatever it is told to produce?
Don't answer, if you think it's flame bait, I don't care. These are just my thoughts upon reading the stuff.
Make sure you remove your real name from the PDF document properties.
I never really knew about how a polygraph worked until I went to work for a company that does physiology equipment and software for research and education. On our website is a video of polygraph data (caution, 5 MB, windows media 9 format, 4 minutes). We don't make actual lie detectors...just educational stuff to illustrate the basic principles of their operation.
The video shows the kinds of body signals that are used in a polygraph that an examiner would look at to tell if someone's lying:
The text at the top of the video indicates what the person is doing when the red triangle appears above the data. They're a little blurred in the video, so I typed them below.
They start out with a list of tasks from simple to complex, illustrating how these three types of signals respond for things like talking and moderately difficult tasks (they wouldn't be used an an actual polygraph calibration). The 'questioning' period is at the end of the video and shows how these signals are used in a polygraph style situation.
The sequence of tasks at the top are
Can you tell if this subject lied on any of the questions? As you can see, a polygraph is definitely not a machine that can kick out a definitive "he's lying". The key to tricking a polygraph is learning how to control your mental state and bodily functions so that you just always reproduce the nice no-stress style signals (kind of like how athletes can pace their breathing to control heart rate).
Disclaimer: This comment is personal and not any kind of statement by my employer. I just think this stuff is interesting and wanted to share...and I'm definitely no pschyophysiology expert and not a polygraph examiner :-)
omni- is from Latin, pan- is from Greek, as is graph. They mean the same thing, and when adding suffixes one generally chooses one from the same language the rest of the word came from.
Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
The NSA doesn't really care that you tried pot 6 years ago
What if I smoked pot for six years straight? No doubt that'd null my candidacy. Which would be a pity because most tokers wouldn't want all the added stress of being a double-agent. I remember the FBI had some weird stipulation that you can't have smoked marijuana more than 11 times or something of the sort on their application. I mean, really, where'd they come up with that figure? Agent1: Agent2, how many times does one have to smoke pot before they go permanently insane or turn communist? Agent2: About a dozen. Agent1: Eleven it is then.
CommentBot 0.7a running with args "-module irritate,disagree -target random"
or, The Guy With The Rubber Hose Was Suprisingly Gentle.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
For those who want to know a secret clearance costs around $2000, while a Top Secret costs $10000.
He did an MMPI-2 which has 567 questions (minnesota multi-phasic personality inventory - 2nd edition). The 5 factor model is from another test, the NEO-PI (Neo Five Factor Personality Inventory.
The MMPI was designed to compare people to statistically defined diagnostic groups (e.g. depressed, psychopath, manic), and later they figured out what those with characteristics of several groups were like (e.g. depressed and psychopath). The also have scales to detect faking in various ways.
The NEO-PI is based on factor analysis (more statistics) which boils down human orientations to the world into 5 main areas.
I'm not a professional therapist but graduated from many 12 step programs
-Turnip Onion --- Neither micro nor $oft. Linux is a fine tool.
...is that it tends to select the same types of individuals and screen out the 'outliers' on the curve. Government work is no different than any other type of work in that it takes all types of personalities and people to get results. Would Abraham Lincoln have been able to pass the screening? What about Douglas MacArthur? Thomas Jefferson? Teddy Roosevelt? Bill Gates? Bill Clinton? In all of these cases, the answer is 'probably not.' Instead, the process tends to select rather bland and reasonable personalities who are attracted to the idea being a small part of a powerful whole. While these types of people can be helpful to any organization, they are not, by themselves, sufficient to accomplish great things. Hence, we end up with government agencies that are hopelessly outclassed in their collective thinking by foreign elements who are antagonistic to our national goals and eventually, we have to pay in our national blood to recover the situation. This pschological/background/profile screening stuff for employees of sensitive government agencies mostly began around the time of World War II and it has not been a good thing IMO.
I've probably seen too many movies but...
Given that certain "extreme" positions do exist within the walls of the NSA (e.g. assassins, spies, field ops, etc), I think it follows that there must be some form of "interview" process for these potential candidates as well. In fact, I suspect that any applicant for pretty much any NSA position probably undergoes this weeding process whether they are aware of it or not. These types of agencies probably always have their eyes open for candidates meeting certain (to use a phrase from Grosse Point Blank) "morally ambiguous" criteria.
For example, I thought it was interesting that the rejected candidate in the above article told the hotel rep that, "Yes, I'm an NSA candidate" when he was already aware that certain aspects of this process should remain a secret. If I were applying for an NSA position, I would assume that everything that happens after the time I start to apply for the job would be a possible test of some kind. That initial disclosure of sensitive information to a (seemingly) innocent question quite possibly closed the door to any sort of "secret agent" possibilities.
Furthermore, I think there was a lot going on during the interview process of which the candidate was not aware. I'm sure that most of what he described (personality tests, psychological evaluations, etc) are standard and can be taken at face value. However, it seems very likely that at least one of the people he came in contact with was someone trained in some form of psychological manipulation or social engineering who was probing for "could he kill a foreign leader?" information.
Also consider the letter he received stating he should arrive at 7:30AM but that his interview wouldn't start until around 12:30PM. Then he was told when he arrived that, yes, he is very early. Is that simply a clerical mistake or perhaps another test of some sort?
Being initially rejected for a position could also possibly be a test. Do you say "ok, fine, it's over" or do you do something creative? (Like pull a Costanza and just show up for work?) (Now I'm giving evidence that I've watched too much TV in addition to the movies.)
Anyway, I think it would be quite something to have an understanding of the candidate selection for spies...but the only people privy to such knowledge are those who have successfully made it through the process....and they're not telling anyone about it unless they follow it up with a cap in the ass.
The competence level inside our intel agencies leaves much to be desired. If you've ever worked for the government you'd know exactly what I mean. Close to 99% of all intel comes from the media, foreign and domestic. The other 1% comes from electronic surveillance, of which there is now a HUGE backlog, thanks to the agencies' reluctance to hire native language speakers. This leaves a whopping 0% to the human intel. If there is ever a face-to-face interview, it's with the defectors, who are all to eager to give our government FUD it wants to hear.
The poster left what looks like a username, the OS it was created on, and the original name of the document (which was a Word doc). No wonder the NSA didn't hire him!
Maybe I missed something but the post is from AC but I swear I've seen that sig before. Not much anonymous about that...
You've got to be kidding. After reading about the amount of personal information he had to give the NSA, and the number of invasive psych tests he had to endure, why do you think anyone would use this memoir as a HOWTO to "infiltrate the NSA"? Get real.
And there's no similarity between these two posts whatsoever.
I'd rate you +5 Paranoid.
I interviewed for a co-op position up here in Canada with the feds that required a pretty high security clearance level. Think Canada's NSA.
:), how often do you look, how much money do you spend on it, what do you do when looking at it (duh :), do you watch with other people, do your friends/s.o. know of your fetishes, etc, etc, etc.
15 page background info to fill out, security interview, polygraph, the whole works. The interview was really, really bizarre. They basically want to know every bad/weird thing you've ever done, so you're pretty much baring your soul to these people.
What amused me the most, though, was when he asked if I had ever looked at pornography (who hasn't). And if I still do (who doesn't).
Well! You'd think I just admitted to killing Kennedy. What followed was probably 10 minutes solid of questions relating to it: What kind do you like (and he broke down into specific categories, some of which *I've* never even heard of, and I click on random Slashdot links all the time
I walked out of that room after 3 hours feeling like I had just run a marathon. To be honest, the whole thing left a bad taste in my mouth, and I ended up taking another job in the private sector. But it bugs me - the feds basically have every little thing about me on file. Would suck if our government decided to be less than ethical, now wouldn't it?
Looking back on it, it was an interesting experience, and while I have nothing to hide (the "worst" thing I've ever done is summed up in my nick) it's still unsettling. I now understand a lot better why privacy as a value in and of itself is a GOOD thing.
I kinda regret going through the process now, but *shrug*.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Admitting reading Chomsky in a public venue? I'm glad SOMEbody is still from "the home of the brave".
:-)
But I'm sure Ann Coulter is gonna GET YOU FOR THIS.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
Even before I saw a few sample questions, I had a hunch, but that's got to be the test the NSA it using. I've taken it myself, and anyone who has taken it will immediately recognize it... a bunch of questions like "I am afraid of doorknobs".
You'd wonder what they could possibly learn from this. Well, a lot. The full name of the test is the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. The test was originally developed in the '30, and has been continually refined since. It even scales to what degree you're attempting to fake the results, and whether you were trying to fake "good, bad, or neutral".
It wouldn't surprise me if a favorable MMPI result was the single most important factor in getting a security clearance.
Point out to them that Internet Explorer is available for free download, then sit back and watch the fun.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Why the heck didn't you tell me that link was going to the GOATSE site...geesh, you should have great big signs in your post in multiple colours and have a holographic Natalie Portman shaking her finger at me saying nonononono don't click on that link!
Oh wait, you did tell me.
Nevermind.
was the MMPI or a variant of it.
Here's the place that developed the test. 565 questions... I've taken it several times.
Plenty of companies use it.
I remember questions like:
I want to be a florist.
I'm afraid of doorknobs.
Here's an alternative to the MMPI, I claim no responsibility for it, I just found it today. MLMPI
-- No sig for you!
If you were a government agency and someone applied for a job with you who was making three times as much as you could pay him in the private sector would not be suspicious of their intentions? This guy obviously was only trying to get in to satisfy his curiousity. He wanted to wonder the halls of Fort Meade and get a pick at the secrets within. This is exactly the type of people they dont want I would think.
Yeah, some day this is really going to put a cramp on my ability to get along with our new overlords, when they come into power. But, why do these people need to have a stick up thier @ss? 95% of us haven't tried to overthrow the US or kill anyone, we just want a life with a home, pool, spouse, kids, and maybe a dog or two.
If you don't hear from me then I'm probably dead, killed by the super secretive black-ops FBI/NSA/CIA/HMO/PCP/LSD/PC people aka the New World Order Gestapo!
he is a little unbalanced. It comes through in the writing and it's not just his smart-ass humor, which was only occassionally funny. Think about it. The whole paper is a work of self-justification in regards to his rejection. I am sure he is a fine guy but I can see why they didn't hire him.
Looks like they made the right decision. He is clearly a blabbermouth. Sheesh. Writing up his experiences on the web and posting it in pdf form with references so that everyone knows exactly how it works?
I know he was not hired. I know it is probably not technically illegal to do. But this shows, in my opinion, that Mr. Clever who posted the whole thing likes to "expose" things. He likes to get a bit of attention and likes everyone to know what a smart cookie he is, even if he did post it quasi-anonymously.
Not good qualities in someone you are going to trust with your secrets.
Looks like the interviews and polygraph did exactly what they were supposed to do.
I did the whole background/everything check.
The agency often lies about how much they actually look into. I tested them on it.
Under my references, I listed someone who was dead. My DSS agent had no idea.
I left a similar permanent position because it was a dry, petrifyingly BORING place, filled with exactly those kind of people (with some grand exceptions) and their bland worklife and outlook. Bland people (as well as arrogant, hyperdriven goal or control driven types) permeate the environment and some of it's most interesting crevices. We all realize that some of the very smartest people are often extremely boring, as well as manipulative, selfish, insensitive, and just genuinely creepy, right? The rare ones are personable and fun, and altruistic.
that scenario would be very reminiscent of catch 22.
Why are USians so obsessed with this quackery known as "polygraph"? Why is taxpayer money used to pay these charlatans, these modern-day phrenologists? Polygraphing is a joke in the rest of the world, much as the Japanese obsession with matching stable personality traits to blood types strikes every non-Japanese person as absurd.
Da Blog
Personally I think the NSA, FBI, SS etc all use polygraphs, security screenings and interviews to COVER THEIR ASSES. Think about it. This whole thing sounded like a OK it says on the checklist to question all his relatives...CHECK onto the polygraph. This is all in response to the Richard Ames and Walker incidents. If someone in the NSA or FBI etc get nailed for espionage and they did all these checks well then it certainly wasn't the HR department's fault this time! It's just a beurocratic ass covering.
I really can't remember stealing candy as a kid.
I don't think I've ever shoplifted anything either. Or experimented with drugs. And all this despite the fact that I consider myself an egoist/hedonist,
I wonder if I would fail a polygraph test just because they would assume that everyone have done that...
Opinions stated are mine and do not reflect those of the Illuminati
I remember hearing somewhere that at one time (in the "bad old days") homosexuals were considered a security risk by various government agencies. It was the presumed fear of being found out and that fear being used by a blackmailer that was at the bottom of that policy.
The question of discrimination aside, in a homophobic society that's a legitimate security concern.
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
Or maybe the poster isn't trying to be anonymous, just trying to moderate and post in the same article.
applied for a program at the NSA when we were in high school. She had to go to some secret military base a few times, take a lot of tests and stuff, and even had me as one of her background check people (getting asked questions by NSA people is kinda scary, esp. considering I'd already been arrested a few times by this point :)). Anyway, she got in, is now in college studying Mandarin, gets a free ride to her school, AND gets about 20 grand a year while in school. She also has a guaranteed job with the NSA for 5 years after she graduates, with her pay increasing on the normal government scale.
I belong to the ______ generation.
Maybe I'm missing something here, but it seems like you're saying the best way to pas a lie detector test is to tell the truth!
No, no, no. You are so wrong.
First of all, the guy you replied to is incorrect by making a distinction between test- and control-questions. In the most often used polygraph technique, there are three types of questions:
1. Relevant ("Are you a spy?")
2. Irrelevant ("Is it Friday today?")
3. Control ("Have you ever stolen anything?", "Have you ever lost your temper?")
The irrelevant questions are used to soak up stress before the interview and between relevant and control questions. They aren't scored at all.
During the test, the examiner will think you are lying if your reaction to a relevant question is less than your reaction to a control question. Why? Because the assumption is that you will answer the control question untruthfully. If you don't lie, that won't be true and there is a good chance you'll fail. An example:
Wrong:
Q: As a kid, did you ever steal anything? [Control question]
A: Yes, I stole some candy.
Q: Other than that, did you ever steal anything? [Rephrased Control question]
A: No. [Physical reaction is reduced because you can't remember anything else]
Q: Have you ever used drugs? [Relevant question]
A: No. [Strong physical reaction because you have a family member who died of drug abuse].
Q: I think you are lying.
A: I might have used drugs once, I don't remember. [Stupid answer because you didn't prepare well and panicked]
Q: Why haven't you told us that earlier? Now I know you are lying. Go to jail, do not collect $200!
Right:
Q: As a kid, did you ever steal anything?
A: No. [Strong physical reaction because you know you are lying].
Q: Have you ever used drugs?
A: No. [Strong physical reaction because you have a family member who died of drug abuse].
Q: I think you are lying.
A: No, I have nephew who OD'd.
Q: Were you friends, did you hang out together?
A: Only as a kid, I lost sight of him when he went over to the dark side. [Drug-using friends reflect badly on you].
Q: Ok. [Examiner disregards your strong reaction to this question]
Note that I have never done a lie detector test, but I read the immensely interesting "The Lie Behind the Lie Detector". If you need to take a lie detector test, you should read it. In this post, I only skimmed the surface of what you really should know. Expending time and energy only to hope that you react properly during the lie detector test is incredibly stupid IMHO (especially because a failed lie detector test might leave a big stain on your security record, so if you fail, you might have trouble getting a job which doesn't even require a lie detector test itself).
The Drowned and the Saved - Primo Levi
There only seemed to be a few posts that looked at this from a false positive / false negative expectation perspective. Clearly the NSA should be willing to endure a high false positive (he's a security risk) rate because the false negative (he's a trustworthy, but actually a spy) consequences are so high.
If you're interested in the polygraph issue, stop by AntiPolygraph.org, where we've assembled a growing library of information on this state-sponsored quackery.
George W. Maschke
AntiPolygraph.org
In the R/I technique, the examinee is asked a series of relevant questions (Did anyone direct you to seek employment with this agency?) mixed with irrelevant ones (Is your name _________________?). The polygraph operator asks the question series several times in different orders. If the examinee shows consistent, specific, and significant reactions to a particular relevant question each time it is asked, no matter the order in which it is asked, deception is inferred and the subject will be interrogated in an attempt to extract a confession/admission.
This technique has no scientific basis whatsoever, however. For further reading, see Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, available free from AntiPolygraph.org.
George W. Maschke
AntiPolygraph.org
the morale of the story is... in order to get clearance, you have to have experimented with drugs, right?
NSA = Not Secret Anymore