Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Marine Corps Bans Social Networking Sites

Posted by Soulskill on from the don't-ask-don't-tweet dept.

Q-Hack! writes "Citing security concerns, the United States Marine Corps has issued an order banning access to social networking sites like Facebook, MySpace and Twitter on its network for the next year. The Pentagon is now reviewing its social networking policy for the entire Department of Defense, which should be completed by the end of September, according to a report from CNN. The policy for the entire military is somewhat fragmented, as the Army ordered military bases to allow access to social media sites in May."

5 of 202 comments (clear)

  1. Re:You can shoot people, son, but don't blog! by binarylarry · · Score: 5, Informative

    They're aren't banned completely, the military just doesn't want it being done on their computers.

    I think that's completely understandable, those sites are very attractive vector for exploits.

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  2. Re:You can shoot people, son, but don't blog! by Anonymous+Cowar · · Score: 5, Informative
    Read the first line of the article:

    Citing security concerns, the United States Marine Corps has issued an order banning access to social networking sites like Facebook, MySpace and Twitter on its network for the next year.

    They're only blocking it at the office, not banishing the marines from using it when they're off duty. Myspace is blocked at a ton of offices, but nobody cries foul. Working for the marines for 9 out of 10 people, is a normal office job, you show up to work, sit in your cube, and do what needs to be done. After that, you go home and can do whatever you want when you're home. This isn't a big deal, they're just trying to keep the marines from twittering their day away.

    For the remaining 1 out of 10 who are stationed "over there," they may rely on the military for network access, but unless things have changed from 3 years ago, if you wanted internet over by baghdad, you had to arrange for your own satellite hookup and use your own computers. This connection was shared amongst a group of guys and was not managed by the military. These small hookups also wouldn't be influenced by the pentagon's orders either.

  3. Re:You can shoot people, son, but don't blog! by sixteenraisins · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not sure why this is even a news story - plenty of employers, my own included, don't want their employees using company hardware or infrastructure to surf Facebook, et al. And they're well within their right to impose those restrictions.

    When you're on the job, you're on the job. Unless you're a professional blogger or some kind of pop culture researcher, chances are Facebook and Myspace aren't part of your job.

    --
    When you're not looking, this sig is in Latin.
  4. Re:You can shoot people, son, but don't blog! by malcomreynolds · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It is not about using military resources "on the job". It's about security. The problem is that extremely few people are security conscious enough to make wise decisions when online. When a civilian is not careful, then may have the hassle of dealing with fraudulent charges on their credit card. If a Marine in Baghdad is not careful, people die. Plain and simple.

    Here's a theoretical tweet: "I have to leave at about 10PM to go on recon in Fadullah. Most of the guy in the platoon doing the patrol are okay, but Lt. Jones is incompetent."

    So anyone following the tweet knows the time of the patrol, the strength and the name of one officer in the platoon. I was in army intelligence and getting just that much during an interrogation might take hours. To have someone simply give it to you is a dream come true. Some group picks up on this, knows that a platoon is doing recon and when, it is simple enough to set up an ambush, booby trap or whatever.

    This is a smart move.

  5. Re:You can shoot people, son, but don't blog! by laejoh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Neal Stephenson puts it like this:

    This "sir, yes sir" business, which would probably sound like horseshit to any civilian in his right mind, makes sense to Shaftoe and to the officers in a deep and important way. Like a lot of others, Shaftoe had trouble with military etiquette at first. He soaked up quite a bit of it growing up in a military family, but living the life was a different matter. Having now experienced all the phases of military existence except for the terminal ones (violent death, court-martial, retirement), he has come to understand the culture for what it is: a system of etiquette within which it becomes possible for groups of men to live together for years, travel to the ends of the earth, and do all kinds of incredibly weird shit without killing each other or completely losing their minds in the process. The extreme formality with which he addresses these officers carries an important subtext: your problem, sir, is deciding what you want me to do, and my problem, sir, is doing it. My gung-ho posture says that once you give the order I'm not going to bother you with any of the details-and your half of the bargain is you had better stay on your side of the line, sir, and not bother me with any of the chickenshit politics that you have to deal with for a living. The implied responsibility placed upon the officer's shoulders by the subordinate's unhesitating willingness to follow orders is a withering burden to any officer with half a brain, and Shaftoe has more than once seen seasoned noncoms reduce green lieutenants to quivering blobs simply by standing before them and agreeing, cheerfully, to carry out their orders.