Slashdot Mirror


NSA Contractor Indicted Over Mammoth Theft of Classified Data (reuters.com)

Dustin Volz, reporting for Reuters: A former National Security Agency contractor was indicted on Wednesday by a federal grand jury on charges he willfully retained national defense information, in what U.S. officials have said may have been the largest heist of classified government information in history. The indictment alleges that Harold Thomas Martin, 52, spent up to 20 years stealing highly sensitive government material from the U.S. intelligence community related to national defense, collecting a trove of secrets he hoarded at his home in Glen Burnie, Maryland. The government has not said what, if anything, Martin did with the stolen data. Martin faces 20 criminal counts, each punishable by up to 10 years in prison, the Justice Department said. "For as long as two decades, Harold Martin flagrantly abused the trust placed in him by the government," said U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein.

6 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Double standard by stevez67 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This wasn't mishandling, it was theft. Mrs. Clinton didn't "steal" her emails. Mrs. Clinton did as 2 of her predecessors in her job did with a personal email server, but I don't see anyone demanding the arrest of Secretary Powell or Rice. This guy obviously had no such role models in his immediate work environment, or they'd have been arrested as well.

  2. Re:Double standard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    This wasn't mishandling, it was theft. Mrs. Clinton didn't "steal" her emails. .

    No, she didn't STEAL anything.. But that's not the point. She MISHANDLED classified information which undoubtedly caused it's disclosure to or advisories. Mishandling is EXACTLY what this guy will be charged with (assuming he didn't give it to anybody) and if he did, unauthorized disclosure will be added to the charges he faces.

    The "intent" part is really the only possible difference here. Hillary claims she didn't know she was mishandling classified information, that she was ignorant of the actual rules and procedures (Personally I don't think she's that stupid, but what does it matter now?).. After 20 years, it is unlikely this guy can claim to be ignorant..

  3. Took? by DarthVain · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That is assuming he did it uniformly over a 20 year period, which is possible, but unlikely.

    You would think they would have not only network but physical safeguards in place to prevent this. I see this as more damning of the NSA security procedure than anything else. Regardless of how you slice it, it is a massive amount of data to be able to go "unnoticed" for 20 years!

    "Unnamed U.S. officials told the Washington Post this week that Martin allegedly took more than 75 percent of the hacking tools belonging to the NSA's tailored access operations, the agency's elite hacking unit."

    Took? They don't have it anymore? Unnamed US officials could have better used the term "copied" I think (though not totally wrong I suppose).

    Somehow I finished that sentence with, When reached for comment Martin said "the other 25% of the hacking tools were rubbish!" :p

    1. Re:Took? by Ogive17 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You would think they would have not only network but physical safeguards in place to prevent this. I see this as more damning of the NSA security procedure than anything else. Regardless of how you slice it, it is a massive amount of data to be able to go "unnoticed" for 20 years!

      Sometimes when someone has worked in a certain area for 20 years, they are given more responsibility. Maybe this guy was suppose to be the safeguard? Not saying that is right way to handle sensitive information but I don't have the details.

      Took? They don't have it anymore? Unnamed US officials could have better used the term "copied" I think (though not totally wrong I suppose).

      Took is a completely acceptable term. He took the data with him. It doesn't say "stole" which would really cause a pedantic shit storm here on /.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
  4. My money is on ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... backup tapes.

    Those are so easy to walk off with.

    I'm retired IT, and many times when I was assisting on another site, I saw backup tapes and EHD, some old, laying around in plain site, some in drawers where tools and connectors were stored, so yeah.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  5. Re:Good reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The contractor arrangement is occurring for several reasons. Of course, because the government allows it. But also many young professionals in the DC area are doing it intentionally in order to make more money. You can get a higher salary if you're a "contractor" to the NSA than you would being hired straight to the NSA. Ignoring things like benefits, the government just doesn't pay enough for security personnel. Hell, last time I looked the NSA was offering *up to* $104,000 for a job that required 5 years experience and a master's degree for software engineering (and probably requires a security clearance as well, which typically adds value to an individual....especially if you hire them when they already have the required clearance. In some cases the value can be up to $15,000-30,000, so employers can give you a $10,000 'bonus' simply for already being cleared and still come out ahead compared to hiring someone who isn't cleared at all).

    Compared to the private sector in the same area, salaries seem to be at least $120,000+ for the same requirements (5 years + masters). With that level of experience it's not uncommon to reach $130,000-140,000 for software engineers who have specialized in system security in the DC area.

    Now, with contracting, you have to go even higher because you're on the hook for your own benefits. So that person who would make $120k full-time in the private sector is probably somewhere up to $170k or higher. Now they contract themselves to the US government, which would have only paid them $100k to start with, but they have the $170k price tag based on the private sector, and they pocket the $20k difference (less taxes). So you do the same work (government work, which is infamous for being slow-paced and secure), have less risk compared to real contract/freelance work, and get more money.

    In DC you're almost guaranteed to have better benefits and more in-pocket cash if you're a "contractor". Most of these "contractor" types don't actually freelance or work anywhere else, they're just gaming the system because they know the NSA and other three letter agencies will play along.