Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Interviewing with the NSA

Posted by michael on from the body-cavity-search dept.

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."

1 of 379 comments (clear)

  1. How to Join the NSA (DO NOTHING) by mitchell_pgh · · Score: 0, Redundant

    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!)