Slashdot Mirror


The FBI Wants To Know About Your IT Skills

AHuxley writes "The FBI, via the Office of Management and Budget, would like to find out more about your information technology expertise if you are part of InfraGard. Terms like 'practical utility' have been included in a 60-day emergency notice of information collection via the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Is your boss or cubicle colleague part of InfraGard? It's a private, non-profit organization run as a public-private partnership with the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Are they passing info back about you or your company?"

4 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Why is this necessarily a bad thing? by mc1138 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While I'm against snooping without cause, something of this in a collaborative model isn't necessarily a bad thing, though it does open up for potential abuse. There are lots of times when I call up buddies ask them what sort of IT issues they're having with security, spam, etc, and this just seems to formalize it a bit, and get the circle of trust a little bigger. Companies too often seek to distrust the authorities for crimes because it will make their companies look weak. As such criminal will get away with things solely because no one reports them. This doesn't look like a secret "Stone Cutter" type group, just a way to get to know some local colleagues and keep more ears to more ground looking for potential threats.

  2. Re:First post! by FooAtWFU · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It seems aimed at big "IT Infrastructure" companies like ISPs, search engines and mail providers: a way to be in touch with these people in the event of "cyberterrorism" and systematic DOS/takeover attempts. It seems like a much better idea than waiting for something to happen and then have no idea who you're supposed to get in touch with about it. Knowing who to call in an emergency shouldn't have to be half the battle.

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  3. Am I missing something? by Callandor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the information provided, which is very little, it appears that the FBI is requesting information from people who have voluntarily joined an organization of IT professionals not just sponsored by but directly affiliated with the FBI. Why is this getting everyone's hackles up? It does not say that the information will be required of all members, nor does it say that members will be required to inform on their coworkers or companies. The ACM asks you about your IT skills, too. How is this different?

  4. Re:missing tags by Savage650 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Bigbrother, snoop, and even Stasi perhaps but KGB, Gestapo? No, as tempting as it may be, the FBI is not rounding up all IT people and sending them to the showers....

    For now, they are just recruiting "volunteers" to watch for "suspicious behaviour" and report "unreliable elements".

    Just the most obvious problems (as mentioned in other posts)

    • how long until "not volunteering" is deemed "suspicious behaviour"?
    • how long until people wronly accuse others for financial gain or just for fun?
    • how long until you'll have to prove your "reliability" by filling your snitching quota?

    Another thing to keep in mind: The so-called "War on Terror" can be used to outlaw anything and anyone.

    Soon after a high-profile Cyber-Attack all knowledge of critical infrastructure(tm) will become classified. Too bad for those lacking the official clearance for things they already know. The state will have to place such persons in "protective custody" camps to keep the terrorists from expoliting their knowledge. Unfortunately, even a short time spent in a such a camp will disqualify you from ever getting back to your former life: While they could'nt prove any previous contacts to "unreliable elements", now they know where you have met them. Finally, once the "unrecovereable elements" are confined to the camps it wont be long until some politician wants the money wasted on their upkeep be spent on his constituency instead. That is where the "showers" come in ..