Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Used for Whistleblowing
fightmaster writes "A Lockheed Martin engineer with concerns about the safety and security flaws in a fleet of refurbished Coast Guard patrol boats turned to YouTube in order to publicize concerns he felt were being ignored by his employer and the government. From the article: 'The 41-year-old Lockheed Martin engineer had complained to his bosses. He had told his story to government investigators. He had called congressmen. But when no one seemed to be stepping up to correct what he saw as critical security flaws in a fleet of refurbished Coast Guard patrol boats, De Kort did just about the only thing left he could think of to get action: He made a video and posted it on YouTube.com.'"
It took me long enough to find this but here's the actual youtube video.
Does this sig remind you of Agatha Christie?
Thank You slashdot editors for providing a link to the video in question.
It actually took me three tries to find it, entitled: "Homeland Security - Coast Guard Issues"
May this post be indexed by spiders, and archived for all to see as my Internet epitaph.
While his employers probably will administratively punish and / or fire him, because his actions may save my coastie brothers and sisters
in the long run,I tip my hat off to you. Sometimes you gotta grab life by the horns, to do the right thing.
Regards,
MBC1977,
(US Marine, College Student, and Good Guy!)
Regards,
MBC1977,
I guess when your youboat is going to sink, you need a youtube to keep you afloat.
He could even setup a podcast of the commander in chief saying "You've sunk my battleship!"
liqbase
If the employer AND the government AND the congressman AND apparently no one else will listen to this boob, maybe, just maybe, his issue ain't that important and he should quit bellyaching.
Does this also apply to engineers of electronic voting systems?
When engineers warned that New Orleans levees could not withstand a moderate-strength hurricane and complained to their employees, AND to the state, AND to the federal government AND apparently no one else would listen to these boobs, maybe, just maybe the issue was important and someone should have listened to their bellyaching.
You idiot.
Did you even watch the video?
Basically the entire project he was working on was a sham. Not only were the systems not designed to specifications but were flawed in such a way as that if they did fail they would do so catastrophically.
Do you even know what FLIR is? It's how they know navigate and identify targets in low-level light conditions or fog (which, I hope I don't have to tell you is very common on coastlines). It's very simple, if the FLIR system fails (and according to him it will at low temperatures), people can die--either from collisions or friendly fire. If what he's saying is true, he should be making a stink.
Furthermore, the security camera issue is huge too. It's one thing to have blind spots. It's quite another to have two symmetrical approach angles that lead right ONTO the ship which can't be seen. Again, a failure due to this design flaw could lead to either the capture or deaths of American servicemen. And it could've been fixed by only adding one more camera.
As far as the non-TEMPEST compliance goes--I don't know. As I understand it, TEMPEST is literally tin-foil hat paranoid, but honestly there's no reason not to use something as simple as shielded cables is that's all that's preventing compliance.
Regardless, this is just another example of how government incompetence combined with corporate greed serves to hurt the American taxpayer and unnecessarily puts the lives of our service-men and women at risk. If you don't think there's a connection between this very believable story and deadly screw-ups like the lack of armored vehicles in Iraq or the Ospreys crashes, you're the boob--not the whistleblower.
-Grym
His DUTY was to INFORM his management, government, congressman, intelligence services, etc. that he had SERIOUS concerns relative to the project he was leading. Anything less is unworthy of the status of Lead Engineer
Cliff Claven
K.E.G. Party Chairman
Founding Leader of: Koncerned for Egalitarin Governance
In spite of modern attempt at historical revision, it is clear to honest historians that Britain won all the battles of 1776 and then left a humbled America to govern itself as punishment for disloyalty. Shortly thereafter, the country spiralled into civil war and went further downhill from there: freedom of its slaves, freedom of speech, and that snake in the grass: "democracy".
So far from England, the Green and Pleasant land, America struggles under inferior governance.
Because of their inferior education, Americans have inferior intellects. This corruption began before the country broke away from British governance. The colonists believed their British brothers had added more tax to their their tea when in fact the wise governors in England had enabled the colonists to purchase tea at a lower price than even smugglers could offer. This allowed the colonists, whose economy had suffered due to their grumblings against Britain, to purchase superior British tea without breaking superior British law.
Our superior tools, dentistry, and teas have made Britain the proud ruler of the world it is today. Our enemies crumble at our feet, as emphasized in the way we single-handedly defeated Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti and hanged, drew, and quartered him at Tyburn.
I have heard CNN and Fox News have been lapse in reporting this to Americans. No surprise, they are inferior news corporations. If you had been watching BBC News, you would know this already.
England Prevails
He said "We found out the FLIR system would not survive temperatures below -5". There is a vast chasm between saying "this FLIR is not rated for -5" and saying "the FLIR would not survive temperatures below -5". I'm not sure on FLIR sensitivity to cold weather, but he is implying it would then break.
Oh another point, all tactical systems that handle classified material and are not in special facilities, e.g. a SCIF, need to be protected against TEMPEST / COMSEC & all that jazz. This is common knowledge for anyone with a SIGINT background in the mil/intel arena.
Obviously a cutter is built for shallow water work. That means near to shores not way out in the Atlantic Ocean. Big Antenna on the shore, camo'd in the trees, picks up classified comms - not unrealistic.
There is no such thing as paranoia when it comes to protecting classified material.
Initially, I was considered as written by an amateur, but then I noticed that part about you being a Marine. Figures!
I think we all know that with the internet and all the videos available now, attention spans are getting far too short for most people on the net to be able to actually *read* something. Countless times I've seen posts (mostly on digg) that say something along the lines of: "TFA too long...anyone have a summary????". I can understand why he'd post a video, especially on the most popular video hosting site. People are just too lazy to read more than a paragraph. Or for that matter, write more than----
mund freud.
Cameras - this doesn't affect any system that digitizes or montors them . All we need was one more camera. As for the security aspect - the CG and LM maintain there is no issue. As such I cannot compromise a non-problem. The boast have been this way for almost a year. if there were issues the CG had plenty of time to correct them. Which is better not fixing this and having that secusrity isue or fixing this with the video (the video was alast resort after 3 years - see below)? (Now the CG has to use a watch stander - they are more secure) FLIR was an example - it might also have been fixed by adding a heater. See we didn't get the environmental requirements until after design review and most of the equip was bought (which is nuts - this is also the time I came on the program ) The FLIR was the first system we looked at. When I told management there was an issue with the FLIR they directed us to stop looking in to the rest. So. . .my worry is that there are more issues (and not just temp)
Cables - EVERY SINGLE cable on each boat that was supposed to be shielded is not. Almost 100 cables on each boat. We actually removed the shielded cable for the old systems we were putting back in. I have a TEMPEST background. I also talked to experts in Lockheed as well as the company that certs Air Force One. All agree that under these conditions it is very improbable that the instrumented test would pass. Also - the IG asked for test data months ago - and hasn't gotten it. They also asked to independently check the boats. The CG won't comply. Don't you think they would if the test actually passed?
As for the way I did this. I spent 3 years - went through 3 LM ethics investigations, coporate legal, the CEO and Board of Directors. I went to the Commandant of the CG, the CO of the boats, the Navy, GAO, NSA etc. Finally the DHS IG agreed to investigate. They have told me all of my claims look to be legitimate. However they can't continue because the CG isn't cooperating. I then went to the Homeland Security Committee and asked them to push the CG - they refused. Meanwhile these boats are operating. Also - all the other gov't orgs who use those classified circuits are at risk.
My advice to some of you - since you are engineers. Don't assume or make judgements until you know what you are talking about. Feel free to email me - imispgh@yahoo.com
There were going to be 49 of these at the time. Going all over the world. They stopped at 8 because the hulls were so badly rusted that they decided not to continue. Plus boats like this get deployed all of the world when needed. Additionally this is a System of Systems effort. Since this was the first platform it means these designs will be pushed to other assets to keep implementations similiar. They did 8 boats like this on purpose - planning on 49. My guess is they intend to continue to do this for commonality reasons as well as to not get caught (change would draw attention.
What does any of that have to do with any of the issues in question here? Interesting, Maybe. Relevent, no.
The guy's employers disagree with him that there is a problem. Simply because he's a "little guy" doesn't make him right. Apperently, no one else on the project agrees with him. But just because he's going up against the "big bad Lockheed Martin" doesn't make him right. We have no proof at all that anything he says is anything more than opinion.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Or maybe. . .just maybe. LM and the CG realize comming clean would be extremely damaging. the DHS IG has already told me there preliminary look has validated my concerns. $24 billion is at stake - do you think they will come clean after doing this on 8 or more boats without be forced?
By the way - I am the one who did the video
If you dont meet TEMPEST standards, there is a high chance someone can intercept 'unencrypted' information either within the 'encrypted' information or on its own, or simply 'sense' it on a power line to the building. (also look up Van Eck phreaking)
There are a few considerations to help ensure the system will pass a TEMPEST test:
- Proper physical separation of Red and Black.
- Suitable filtering of power supplies.
- Propper shielding (parent got that one)
- Propper termination of shielding into correct EMI Backshells
- Correct assembly and termination of backshells
- More about what I've said Here [PDF]
Basically if you skimp on any of these to save a few dollars (and it aint cheap), the bad guys can intercept your communications (COMINT), which means your likely to get your ass handed to you on a plate...
PS: All of what Ii've said above is unclass and is in the public domain....
As prior military who worked on UHF SATCOM (satellite communications systems) for a period of nearly four years as a lead programmer in the Air Force, I would tend to believe rather than disregard these statements. I have worked with forces from US Coast Guard, Navy, Army, Air Force, NATO forces, etc and in real-world scenarios, operational security is often overlooked or even covered up in order for projects to not lose funding or lose face in the eyes of upper management and project supporters high up in the government. It is also overlooked sometimes because of the BS red tape involved to implement the simplest security protocols. I pray that some of these issues have been resolved or that the shortcomings described have been negated by other means, however I doubt it. I wish you good luck in your fight and hope that in the end you are vindicated - if so, I hope you sue LM's ass off for the hell I'm sure you've been through. Thanks for standing up - let us know how we can help.
I am a Program Manager for a large defense contractor. I have no first hand knowledge about the specific program and concerns described in the video. However, I can provide some insight into how and why the Coast Guard and a contractor might ethically and responsibly act in the ways described in the video.
First, most defense contracts of the type described are so called "Cost Plus" contracts. That means that the Government and the contractor share the financial risk of executing the program. The government agrees to reimburse the contractor for whatever the actuals costs of executing the program are plus a pre-negotiated profit. The government retains complete control over the contract, regularly audits the contractor's financial data to establish the actual costs, and reserves the right to modify or cancel the contract at any time.
The DoD also has standard military specifications (mil-specs), and the -40 to +140 deg. temperature range cited in the video sound like a standard mil-spec to me. Now, if you are the government and I tell you the cost of refitting ships with FLIR that operates at -40, you might decide you don't really want that feature and grant a waver on the mil-spec. Why would you do that ? Well, you might know that the ship's engines won't work at that temperature either because the fuel oil will be too viscus. Why go to added expense for one component if another critical component won't work anyway ?
The government is in complete control. When the government insists on over-specifying systems, you get the notorious $1000 hammer. The classic example was a spec that required every component of an aircraft be able to survive 72 instantaneous Gs (a very hard landing). Do you have any idea how expensive coffee pots that can survive that many Gs are ? Guess what, you paid for them. The smarter decision would be to replace a $13 coffee pot after every such "crash". I assure you that the coffee pot is a lot cheaper than the pilot's back surgery.
Similarly, blind spots in camera coverage can be inexpensively corrected, and the Coast Guard may have elected to pay a low cost small business supplier to correct the problem instead of paying a large defense contractor's rates. Again, the government has control over all of these decisions.
Finally, if the cabling passes the TEMPEST tests, then it passes. It is entirely possible that the hull of the ship makes a very effective Faraday cage, and additional shielding on the cables is a wasted expense. Again, the government may actually be saving you money.
I don't know if the accusations have merit or not. I just wanted to point out that everything accused might be true and still be both ethical and down right sensible.
I agree with both you and the parent, so here is a brief summary for Generation Net:
1) Not enough security cameras
2) Bad (unshielded) communications cables
3) Equipment won't survive the extreme temperatures
4) No one cares, billions of dollars and national security at risk.
But, some of us really do prefer reading (and apparently, transcribing), and since google couldn't find me a transcript, here's one I made while waiting for my WoW trial to download, heh.
---
Before I begin, I want to tell you that making videos like this is not something I do as a profession, so please bear with the crudeness of the effort, and my reading from a prepared statement.
What I'm going to tell you is going to seem preposterous and unbelievable, and may be very hard for you to believe that our government and the largest defense contract in the world is capable of such alarming incompetence, and can make ethical compromises as glaring as what I'm going to describe. Having said that, I assure you that everything I'm stating here is accurate. I have resorted to creating this video because I've exhausted every avenue I can think of, and in spite of the negative effects it has had or will have on me and my family, I feel very strongly that I need to take this step in order to resolve these issues.
The purpose of this video is to ask for your assistance in helping me resolve several serious safety and security issues relating to homeland security. Specifically, the U.S. Coast Guard.
Several years ago, I was Lockheed Martin's C4ISR system engineering lead for the 123 project on the Deepwater program. The purpose of this effort was to upgrade the Coast Guard's fleet of 110-foot patrol boats, to not only lengthen their servicable life, but to add space onto the rear of the boat to accomodate the Zodiac rescue boat, and to install modern command, control, communication, computer information, and surveillance systems on these boats to prepare them for a post-9/11 world.
My responsibilities on this effort were to ensure the designs we created fulfilled requirements, and to complete the installation and delivery of the first boat. During my tenure on this project, several critical safety and security problems arose.
These issues included:
-The camera surveillance system.
We had a requirement to provide a camera surveillance system for the boats. The purpose of the system was to permit the Coast Guard to monitor these boats while in a Coast Guard port, without having to have a watch-stander on board. The main purpose of the system is to ensure that no one can access or board the boats without being seen.
The implementation that Lockheed Martin proposed, and that was finally accepted by the Coast Guard, left two extremely large blind spots leading directly to the pilot house, or the bridge, of the ship. These blind spots are over 10 feet wide on the deck, and extend to hundreds of feet wide at the horizon. I have an engineering rendering of the blind spots. [holds up image depicting blind spots] Here is the forward part of the boat, and the covered zones are here in the lighter color. As you can see here, and here, there are two very large blind spots leading all the way to the horizon that the crew cannot see, and they lead right up and into the bridge.
While this problem could have been easily remedied by simply providing another camera to fill the blind spots, Lockheed Martin and the U.S. Coast Guard decided to deliver these boats without the extra camera. This situation leaves the boats and the crew in a position where someone could access the boat without beeing seen. While it is possible to augment the cameras with a watch stander, that situation puts the Coast Guard in the exact position they originally tried to avoid, with the additional expense of a system that does not meet their needs.
The next issue:
-Environmental survivability of the equipment.
Just prior to the installation of the systems on the ship, we were fina