Slashdot Mirror
Federal Prosecutors Tempt the Streisand Effect
decora writes "As the case of NSA IT guru Thomas Andrews Drake nears trial, the fur has been flying between the defense and prosecution lawyers. Earlier this week the judge ordered the sealing of a defense motion because the government claimed it contained classified information. The problem? The document had been sitting on the Federation of American Scientists website for several days. Another problem: the document is marked 'Unclassified' in big bold letters at the top of the page."
My knee-jerk reaction would be that somebody not familiar with the technical details may have marked this incorrectly and then posted it. Just because the top of the page says unclassified doesn't mean an honest mistake couldn't have occurred to cause it to get labeled incorrectly. If wouldn't surprise me if they are trying to protect one individual number within that document with the new (more protective) classification.
I'm in Canada. I have downloaded the document. I await the black helicopters...
They're tempted to have a big nose and be immensely popular with homosexuals?
/me ducks
That would prevent them from attacking him on the basis of that release, however this was a sealing of a defense motion. ie, the government indicated that the original document was misclassified and was trying to correct that so the normally public court document needed to be sealed. If that's all they are doing, there is nothing to see here.
AJ Henderson
No it doesn't. FOUO is a handling Caveat not a Classification. It's not a caveat applicable to classified material because their handling is by default different and restrictive. The document is marked unclassified because it is an unclassified document used/created in an environment where classified materials are extensively used or created, thus it needs to be clearly marked so as to not get it confused with or mixed in with classified materials. The information also meets one or more of the requirements for exemption from FOIA requests, thus the FOUO handling Caveat is applied, which mainly means that FAS shouldn't have gotten it in the first place.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
It doesn't appear the government has asserted the document is classified - that's a term of art meaning that the release of the data would compromise national security in some way. Instead, they've declared that the data was marked For Official Use Only, which means the data is unclassified, but not for wide dissemination.
Let's break it down. We have classified information, which is data that, if released, would affect the national security. This determination is made by the President or directly appointed representatives only - I think Deputy Secretary of the Army/Navy/whatever is the lowest level with classification authority. Everyone else is merely applying the policies as determined by the originating authority. So I, as a low-level contractor, cannot unilaterally decide to classify a piece of information. Instead, I apply a predetermined set of rules (does it come from system A or mention topic B) to data I sort, and mark it appropriately.
For classified data, there are three broad groupings - Confidential, Secret, and Top Secret. Secret has a subcategory of NoForn - not to be shared with foreign governments. Top Secret has a bazillion "code-word" subcategories - my favorite was Cosmic Top Secret.
There is also a category of unclassifed information that should not be in wide release. This is information that would not impact national security, but should still be controlled. The classic example is Personally Identifiable Information (PII). Leaking your address and social wouldn't impact national security, and neither would leaking your medical records or job evaluations. But I think we'd all agree this information should be kept out of the public eye, so it's marked FOUO. Not classified, but still not for dissemination.
The other category of FOUO information tends to be operational details for a command. This would include unit movements, detailed meeting schedules, specific evaluation criteria, etc. The stuff that, in a corporation, would be tagged Company Propriatary.
Finally, there is unclassified information that is treated as classified. This is generally any build media used for classified systems. The media itself isn't classified - it's straight from the vender. But once we have it, we treat it as if it's classified at the level of the system it was used to build. That way, no one can modify the unclassified source material without already having access to the classifed data.
Since when is Canada not a state in the U.S.? :)
Since we were on top. ;)
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
It's not silly at all. The prosecutors were just dumb to not know the rules. The NSA properly marked the document as UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO then the dumbass attorneys wanted to say "it's classified!" when it clearly isn't, since FOUO is a handling instruction (not a classification) that is used for unclassified information only.
The point of FOUO is to exempt information from Freedom of Information Act. It doesn't meet the standards for the lowest classification of CONFIDENTIAL, but deserves shielding from public view, usually things like Names, Addresses, Phone Numbers, Military Unit schedules, etc.
Why do people keep treating freedom and security as being in conflict?
This is America. Security is the defense of freedom.
There have been many governments in history, and still are today, where liberty has been extinguished. They were and are not safe to live under.
So much wrong in the summary and all the linked stories. I expect more from slashdot.
First, FOUO is a handling instruction, not a classification. There are only 4 classification levels (unclassified, confidential, secret, top secret), and there are hundreds of handling instructions and classification combinations. FOUO, however, can only be used with UNCLASSIFIED, and merely exempts unclassified information from Freedom of Information Act.
Second, the individual pages of that letter is marked UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO top and bottom, but that is only the highest classification of the particular single page in question. If these pages are in a larger document with higher classifications, they indeed take on the highest classification of the overall document. We don't know, because the title page with the classification authority is not present. My guess is that it comes from a document of higher classification.
Finally, the analyst is guilty of leaking information that has handling instructions of FOUO--information that is not to be disseminated to the public. This means he is not authorized to release this information. It's a security violation. Not as severe as leaking classified information, but still a violation.
Of course the document has been deemed misclassified only after it has been found essential to the defense.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Slashdot has been re-Tweeting long before "re-Tweeting" was a word. "Re-Tweeting" would be called Slashdotting if life were fair and language went to the pioneers.
If that were the case, the English language would have never been invented.
nothing to see here?
Its rare to see the NSA in court. It was historically very rare to see the NSA in the press or books.
Recall "Computer ills hinder NSA 2 technology programs, weapons for the war on terrorism, have proved duds"
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2006-02-26/news/0602260086_1_cryptologic-agency-technology-programs
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/04/nsa-executive-charged/
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
The Fwench have been re-Tweeting for centuries. Silly Wabbit.
The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
I tried reading the link article about the whatever it was prize, and fell asleep about two paragraphs in. Can someone provide a link to something that explains his significance? Something that is to the point. Something that doesn't ramble on about his grade school or who changed his diapers?
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.