Slashdot Mirror
Why the NSA Can't Replace 90% of Its System Administrators
An anonymous reader writes "Curious about the recently purposed NSA cuts, Courtney Nash explores a few myths about systems automation 'In the aftermath of Edward Snowden's revelations about NSA's domestic surveillance activities, the NSA has recently announced that they plan to get rid of 90% of their system administrators via software automation in order to "improve security." So far, I've mostly seen this piece of news reported and commented on straightforwardly. But it simply doesn't add up. Either the NSA has a monumental (yet not necessarily surprising) level of bureaucratic bloat that they could feasibly cut that amount of staff regardless of automation, or they are simply going to be less effective once they've reduced their staff.'"
That's one way to reduce the number of sysadmins effectively.
> or they are simply going to be less effective once they've reduced their staff.
Which wouldn't be such a terrible thing.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
The worst thing you can do with a person in a privileged access position is tell that person substantially in advance that they have a 90% chance of being made redundant. The overwhelming majority of people are reasonable, rational and won't do anything - but when you have such a large set of people - some won't be so amenable to being pushed out the door.
In short, I'd be surprised if they haven't created a small army of potential Edward Snowden's through this. Wherever I've worked, if we made a system administrator redundant we'd have disabled their account before they were told and then broke it to them - even if it was under consideration, we'd send them home with pay for the duration - it's just common sense.
-SG
... 100% of potential leakers are now 90% sure that they're going to lose their job anyway.
Carry on, NSA.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Hello? Have you have your sarcasm detector surgically removed?
And please don't do that fucking boneheaded bit with the fucking asterisks. If you're really fucking old enough to say "fuck" and that's what you fucking mean, then fucking say "fuck", already. Otherwise, just fucking use a different fucking word.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
then isn't this discussion even more of a waste of time than usual on slashdot?
Law of headlines... no. It's probably about the same amount of time wasted.
Plain and simple the federal government is suposed to be small, the states are suposed to be the ones with the power.
And who is supposing this? Also, people might have had more sympathy for States' Rights if states didn't use them to oppress people.
SILLY RABBIT!
The NSA will just set up shop in Dubai, with their other Haliburton friends... They will import labor that can barely speak English, and with Dubai's labor laws they can literally padlock the employees to the desks.
Manning and Snowden both prove anybody not an "Inquisitor" for the team is a liability to the cause. They consider themselves OUTSIDE the law, don't expect them to learn the lessons we think they should.
My guess is a change of title, too.
I don't understand why the news and journals report what the NSA announces. For a long time this agency didn't even exist officially. They are allowed and expected to lie about absolutely everything, there are not even reliable records on how many people they employ. Their official statements are and have always been deliberate bullshit and disinformation. It's pointless to take into account anything they say about themselves at all.