Slashdot Mirror


Thousands of Job Applicants Citing Top Secret US Government Work Exposed In Amazon Server Data Breach (gizmodo.com)

According to Gizmodo, "Thousands of files containing the personal information and expertise of Americans with classified and up to Top Secret security clearances have been exposed by an unsecured Amazon server, potentially for most of the year." From the report: The files have been traced back to TigerSwan, a North Carolina-based private security firm. But in a statement on Saturday, TigerSwan implicated TalentPen, a third-party vendor apparently used by the firm to process new job applicants. "At no time was there ever a data breach of any TigerSwan server," the firm said. "All resume files in TigerSwan's possession are secure. We take seriously the failure of TalentPen to ensure the security of this information and regret any inconvenience or exposure our former recruiting vendor may have caused these applicants. TigerSwan is currently exploring all recourse and options available to us and those who submitted a resume."

Found on an insecure Amazon S3 bucket without the protection of a password, the cache of roughly 9,400 documents reveal extraordinary details about thousands of individuals who were formerly and may be currently employed by the U.S. Department of Defense and within the U.S. intelligence community. The files, unearthed this summer by a security analyst at the California-based cybersecurity firm UpGuard, were discovered in a folder labeled "resumes" containing the curriculum vitae of thousands of U.S. citizens holding Top Secret security clearances -- a prerequisite for their jobs at the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and the U.S. Secret Service, among other government agencies.

115 comments

  1. regardless... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    TigerSwan was negligent by outsourcing to a negligent vendor. If you want something done right, do it yourself.

    1. Re:regardless... by quonset · · Score: 2

      If you want something done right, do it yourself.

      You are so right. When revealing personal information, do it yourself.

  2. boring backside of deep state? by sittingnut · · Score: 1

    deep state is no doubt feeling embarrassed, caught like this with its pants down, exposing its boring workaday backside of grunts.
    only penetration is lacking.
    any takers?

  3. My security clearance resume... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    My current job is at [REDACTED] and my security clearance is [REDACTED]. My cover story is cleaning out IT closets. My actual job description is [REDACTED].

    1. Re: My security clearance resume... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can redact anything you want. It doesn't mean the information was actually sensitive. I highly doubt fetching coffee for other employees actually requires a security clearance. But, hey, you should still be able to provide an Amazon referral link for this, right?

    2. Re:My security clearance resume... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't too hard for anybody that wants to find out were you work since you post pictures of your work place with surrounding buildings online.

      creimer says; no,no, I only posted picture of the roof...:
      https://school.discoveryeducat...

    3. Re: My security clearance resume... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      You can redact anything you want. It doesn't mean the information was actually sensitive.

      I had to scrub my LinkedIn profile shortly after I got hired. A well-known whistle blower contacted me via LinkedIn wanting to meet with me. Of course, I reported this to management and security.

      I highly doubt fetching coffee for other employees actually requires a security clearance.

      I don't handle classified information. But I do work on systems that might have classified information and I might find out something that I'm not supposed to know.

      But, hey, you should still be able to provide an Amazon referral link for this, right?

      Hopscotch with Walter Matthau and Glenda Jackson is one of my favorite Cold War spy movies. When a veteran spymaster is sidelined by the CIA, he decides to write his memoirs and mails one chapter at time to all the intelligence services while "hopscotching" between America and Europe with the CIA and KGB on his tail.

    4. Re:My security clearance resume... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you sound bitter, sweet tits

    5. Re:My security clearance resume... by ls671 · · Score: 1

      My cover story is cleaning out IT closets. My actual job description is [REDACTED].

      Strange agency you work at. In mine, once our cover is blown, we retire.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    6. Re:My security clearance resume... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh wow check out Walter Mitty up there!

    7. Re:My security clearance resume... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you sound bitter, sour dick

    8. Re: My security clearance resume... by ls671 · · Score: 1

      I had to scrub my LinkedIn profile shortly after I got hired. A well-known whistle blower contacted me via LinkedIn wanting to meet with me. Of course, I reported this to management and security.

      Hey, that was me and I just wanted to share linking strategies for our revenue streams since I have some too. Anyway, it is useless to "scrub" you LinkedIn profile once you made the information available.

      I don't handle classified information. But I do work on systems that might have classified information and I might find out something that I'm not supposed to know.

      Don't worry about that. As a whistle blower I know people who earn 200K a year just to make sure this doesn't happen.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    9. Re:My security clearance resume... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Think about it from the US gov/mil perspective.
      Say a US clandestine agency needed a skilled flight crew to load a big transport aircraft and fly a lot of support in for "freedom" to some "pro democracy" group.
      The US clandestine agency does not want a log of its complex crew searches and have to request a decrypt of many different gov/mil/contractor databases.
      So all that mission critical worker data is easy to search and kept in a format every US gov computer system can access without questions or tracking.
      The database work and needed networks got set up in that way for total and easy access by any US gov/mil computer system.
      The US gov and mil thinks its still 1970-1980 and all the plain text worker data is totally safe on a base/building in a very physically secure location. Fences and guards kept vast, fast plain text databases totally safe.
      Staff skills are needed, the databases now exist and are been searched all over the USA in 2017.
      Total access and no logging with no encryption is the US mil/gov way of getting clandestine work done.
      Missions cant wait for access or decryption requests to get approved. Staff with very different skills are needed and can only be found by searching every US gov/mil database.

      No US clandestine agency will trust the people who have access to logs in their own systems. Complex search logs give away missions been planned.
      No US clandestine agency can trust the people who grant access to decryption in their own systems. Decryption requests allows well placed spies to find out what areas the US gov is looking into.
      So everything is left as plain text as a matter of policy that once worked so well for the USA over the years.
      But the US gov did not think to secure the plain text data to a just a few physical sites.
      Once very secure data is now floating on the "internet" with the same access ability.
      Contractors, the US mil, the US gov all want to use internet services in 2017 just the same way as they always had for once very secure mil/gov computer sites.
      Its not about encryption, only access. Its just the way the US gov/mil has always worked with data sets and expects all new data to be presented. Security is expected around the data. Encryption should never not to slow a search of all the data. Collect it all, access it all, search it all is the wider policy.
      Security is just expected to keep working like it just did over the decades. Most staff just want to search or upload new data in the correct gov/mil plain text way.

      The other security issue the USA thought long about was the US gov/mil analyst needed. In other nations all data was hidden, secure and had to be requested in person.
      That slowed down their ability to work with real time information and historic information.
      The US gov/mil gave their now cleared staff better access to plain text data sets that could be searched. The US had a much better ability to search real time data. But all that needed secure sites to stay secure. The once secure methods of working with vast amounts of unencrypted data have been put on the internet.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    10. Re:My security clearance resume... by PPH · · Score: 1

      This makes sense. But looking at it another way, it's not necessary for an adversary to examine your search parameters. They can make a pretty decent guess at what you are up to by examining the results of your search (who you hired) if they know what individuals' skill sets are.

      And some of that intelligence is valuable long after the fact. So building up a list of where people were from resumes and past assignments is still of considerable use to an enemy. Operational data (where we might be shipping arms today) has a short shelf life. Strategic data and information about systems' capabilities is useful for a long time. Results of someone doing R&D a decade ago may turn up on the battlefield now.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    11. Re:My security clearance resume... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Re " But looking at it another way, it's not necessary for an adversary to examine your search parameters. "
      That depends if the USA is doing a new version of Iran Contra and needs to ensure no system or network ever keeps any related files/logs this time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...–Contra_affair
      Re "They can make a pretty decent guess at what you are up to by examining the results of your search (who you hired) if they know what individuals' skill sets are."
      The US had a few considerations over the decades that shaped US thinking on that one.
      The US got into the Verona files. But the Soviet Union found out about US decryption efforts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Great to get the data, needed to keep the translated results more secret.
      The other ability was tracking the build up to say a Tet Offensive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Lots of skilled US analysts looking over translated data and real time information. Let the enemy know of such skills? Try a cover story about a defector?
      The US later had huge realtime search ability over computer networks with emerging systems like the Community On-line Intelligence System.
      Other nations still used index cards. Safe but too slow to search.
      Plain text information was used as the network stayed secure and the USA could get instant results from its global data collection.

      The other idea was the ability of US analysts to feel trusted within their own clearance and compartmentalization to search for anything and they would not feel questioned over access or as to why for every search term entered. Happy, trusted gov/mil staff got better results searching deep into big global databases.
      Other nations demanded their staff explain every search with extra paperwork and got needed approvals.
      More secure as a spy could not search for terms they wanted but a slow system.
      Lots of reasons as to why the USA still needs plain text and fails to use encryption. But for that the US networks always had stay secure into 2017.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    12. Re:My security clearance resume... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you sound balanced, man tits

    13. Re:My security clearance resume... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      creimer, what do you know about dicks? You haven't seen yours since Duran Duran was on the charts.

    14. Re: My security clearance resume... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Warning: goatse link.

    15. Re: My security clearance resume... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Warning: goatse link.

      Here's a Goatse t-shirt that the kids might like.

    16. Re: My security clearance resume... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      That's a relief. It could have been him with his shirt off.

      Again.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    17. Re:My security clearance resume... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your walls of words are clearly not the work of someone who knows wtf they're talking about. You've most certainly never had access or you'd know better.

  4. And THIS is why we MUST halt all Chinese Imports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because this we must stop.

    Same would apply to Russia but of course, Russia has nothing anybody wants.

  5. OPM breach by rfengr · · Score: 1

    The OPM data breach lost all the shit anyway. It's a treasure trove for identity theft. Where did you go to high school, what was you mothers maiden name, what was you address 20 years ago? It's all in those SF171 forms.

  6. oops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My bad. I meant to type rm -rf resumes/, but I apparently typed chmod -R a+rw resumes/. It won't happen again. I got U next time, fam.

  7. nobody thinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So yeah it's bad when something sensitive ends up on amazon cloud with no password. That's obvious. What no one ever talks about, is so what if it did have a password? Amazon and likely hundreds of employees have access to it.

    1. Re:nobody thinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they don't. It's in the terms of service that they can't look at files unless they have a police warrant.

    2. Re: nobody thinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Muhahha. Gru disagrees.

    3. Re:nobody thinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *citation needed

    4. Re: nobody thinks by bestweasel · · Score: 1

      Does "can't look at files" mean they're unable to look or not allowed to look? Is access prevented, audited? Does anyone check?

    5. Re:nobody thinks by PPH · · Score: 1

      unless they have a police warrant

      This wouldn't even slow down the BOFH.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  8. Security requires consequences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have worked with programmers who are really smart, easily able to solve very tricky or complex problems, and yet also terribly sloppy when it came to security (prone to doing things like what someone at TalentPen allegedly did).

    Intelligence is simply not enough. Proper security also requires the right mindset and the will to get it right. Companies are happy whenever they can find anyone that can get stuff working, and management generally just assumes that these developers know what they are doing and are always thinking about security already. Which is patently false, especially during crunch time.

    Engineering proper security into products begins at the top; the execs must be serious about it, and they must be serious about building policies around it, screening candidates that can do it, hiring and utilizing auditors for it, etc.

    Without that level of focus from the top, security simply does not happen, no matter how smart the crew is.

  9. Not identity theft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The OPM data breach lost all the shit anyway. It's a treasure trove for identity theft. Where did you go to high school, what was you mothers maiden name, what was you address 20 years ago? It's all in those SF171 forms.

    You're thinking too small. It's not about identity theft. It's about intelligence work and social engineering of people who are involved in national security. It's about recruiting new spies. It's about predicting and influencing policy. And with resumes, it's about understanding another country's secret projects so you can work against them.

    https://yro.slashdot.org/story...

    1. Re:Not identity theft. by geekmux · · Score: 1

      The OPM data breach lost all the shit anyway. It's a treasure trove for identity theft. Where did you go to high school, what was you mothers maiden name, what was you address 20 years ago? It's all in those SF171 forms.

      You're thinking too small. It's not about identity theft. It's about intelligence work and social engineering of people who are involved in national security. It's about recruiting new spies. It's about predicting and influencing policy. And with resumes, it's about understanding another country's secret projects so you can work against them.

      https://yro.slashdot.org/story...

      Ah, so I'm guessing a website that specializes in whoring out resumes that include massive lists of US Citizens holding Top Secret clearances has already been confiscated by the US Government, and was shut down?

      Oh look, LinkedIn is still up and running. Gee, I wonder why that is. Maybe it's because US Citizens holding Top Secret clearances has never been deemed classified, confidential, or even sensitive enough to not put on a resume that you freely share with damn near anyone and everyone.

      This was a leak of PII (drivers license detail, SSNs, etc.) and nothing more. The parent was right. The OPM hack makes this look like stolen lunch money by comparison.

  10. you're responsible for your vendors by doctorvo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "At no time was there ever a data breach of any TigerSwan server," the firm said. "All resume files in TigerSwan's possession are secure. We take seriously the failure of TalentPen the security of this information and regret any inconvenience or exposure our former recruiting vendor may have caused these applicants."

    You're responsible for your vendors, doubly so since assessing security of others is your business.

    In a sane universe, the founders and owners of TigerSwan would be sued for every dime they have and be barred in perpetuity from all government contracts. In reality, this will get papered over using lame excuses, and Democrats and Republicans will continue to unite in institutionalized corruption and cronyism, in particular in favor of ex-military and ex-government employees.

    1. Re:you're responsible for your vendors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modded, so Anon

      There's a reasonable likelihood that the "founders and owners of TigerSwan" and the 'founders and owners of TalentPen' share striking resemblances,

      The division of 'departments' into separate corporate entities would be a 'sensible' choice in that it distances the 'not holding company (founders and owners)' from any fallout over an act of corporate malfeasance.

      The rest, you nailed it ... but I dare to dream, not! "In reality..."

    2. Re:you're responsible for your vendors by juliuszs · · Score: 1

      You are depressingly right.

  11. Why the hell is this even possible? by mhkohne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not that it's an excuse, but in what universe is it OK to have internet-connected data repositories that don't have a password? When is that EVER a good idea? Why can you even create a bucket without some kind of authorization on it? That's just kinda stupid.

    And yea, TigerSwan: You were freaking responsible for the data. You might not directly employ the guy who screwed up, but your contractors are YOUR problem. The fact that you obviously DIDN'T control your contractors properly indicates that you probably aren't the right guys for the job.

    --
    A thousand pounds of wood moving at 300 feet per minute. Don't get in the way.
    1. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What world do you live in where you've never downloaded any kind of software without having to type in a password?

    2. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you need a password to open slashdot.org? A password for every image loaded from a static data store?

    3. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not that it's an excuse, but in what universe is it OK to have internet-connected data repositories that don't have a password? When is that EVER a good idea? Why can you even create a bucket without some kind of authorization on it? That's just kinda stupid.

      Amazon S3 is used for content hosting for public web sites; of course, there are public buckets.

    4. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      Not that it's an excuse, but in what universe is it OK to have internet-connected data repositories that don't have a password? When is that EVER a good idea? Why can you even create a bucket without some kind of authorization on it?

      Mostly for hosting web pages. People host their websites on AWS (obvously) and any static resources gets hosted in either S3 or a CDN.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      Not that it's an excuse, but in what universe is it OK to have internet-connected data repositories that don't have a password? When is that EVER a good idea? Why can you even create a bucket without some kind of authorization on it? That's just kinda stupid.

      And yea, TigerSwan: You were freaking responsible for the data. You might not directly employ the guy who screwed up, but your contractors are YOUR problem. The fact that you obviously DIDN'T control your contractors properly indicates that you probably aren't the right guys for the job.

      This has been done before and one of 4 times my data has been hacked. https://www.computerworld.com/...

    6. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not that it's an excuse, but in what universe is it OK to have internet-connected data repositories that don't have a password?

      I think I am stuck on earth in this universe. Our technology is advancing and is definitely interesting. We've made it crystal clear though that we don't care about privacy though. Maybe we are regressing in some ways.

    7. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that you obviously DIDN'T control your contractors properly indicates that you probably aren't the right guys for the job.

      This irks me a bit - it's almost like you've never paid for someone else to do work. The whole point of it is that you're not doing it. you can do some verification, some proof of concept, you can execute some sort of testing strategy, but what it comes down to is that if you are checking every keystroke somebody makes, why the heck did you outsource the work to begin with? If you're verifying every itty bitty detail, you might as well be manufacturing those details in the first place, rather than having someone else do it.

      This is how you learn whether your vendors are doing their jobs and if you should start shopping around, and it's very likely that TigerSwan will be suing TalentPen to shift some of the liability of this loss onto them.

      Otherwise, I fully agree with this post. The liability starts with TigerSwan, and they will have to deal with it. If they're lucky they can shift the brunt of the fallout to TalentPen through lawsuits, and potentially have some investors step in to fund damages from the liability in the meantime. But, that all takes time, and everyone is so fly-by-night these days, chances are TalentPen is under in two weeks, and pops up with a new name in six weeks, and TigerSwan will teeter over too because they're not going to be able to simply shift all of the operations that they depend on through TalentPen overnight.

    8. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't just create a bucket with these permissions... you have to explicitly set them. AWS S3 is private and locked down by default:
      http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/s3-access-control.html

    9. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I am stuck on earth in this universe. Our technology is advancing and is definitely interesting. We've made it crystal clear though that we don't care about privacy though. Maybe we are regressing in some ways.

      The "we" you speak of isn't anyone working in the IC community. There are constant warnings about posting stuff.

    10. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Contracting others doesn't relieve you of your responsibility to oversee them, nor your liability. Just because you have this great idea for a business model doesn't mean you know how to do all of the work yourself, so outsourcing some IT is perfectly acceptable, but you need to be clear on the requirements. So, the question is, did TigerSwan have those requirements in place? But, even if they did, they clearly didn't have the proper oversight.

    11. Re:Why the hell is this even possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in the days when ships were wood and men were steel, you have govt agents interview and collect hardcopy forms from employees to be cleared for security. These notes and forms are placed in big heavy steel cabinets in a govt building with thick walls and thick doors with sturdy locks. Security problems were then making sure someone doesn't accidently leave documents outside the locked facility or throw them in the trash. Of course also security problems of insider making copies of documents and selling them to foreign govts. Really. A badged security official like an FBI agent but from either DIA or OPM collects this stuff. I always wondered what would happen now they have contractor employees doing the same. Then comes the 21st century all these contractors sell their services, "we can do it better, more efficient, more secure than what the guvmint can do." "Though all in digital, it will be easy to share between agencies that need it but the security will be 100% triple authenicated!" I mean it's like the line from the movie, "Once we have six lane superhighways, traffic jams will no longer exist and it will be beautiful."

  12. Have they jailed the hacker yet? by burtosis · · Score: 1

    Surprised Chris Vickery from upguard wasn't slapped with felony cyber terrorism charges and arrested yet. This kind of unauthorized access is criminal and he should never see the light of day, much less a computer, for the rest of his life. TigerSwan and TalentPen are the real victims here. He probably even wears a hoodie. /s

  13. Stupid headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why does this writer hate Amazon? There is only one reason to say that the file was on an Amazon server and that is to make the readers think that Amazon servers are unsecure. S3 is "no access" by default. Someone has to intentionally set an access policy that allows read from the internet. Someone incompetent did just that. Amazon is not at fault here.

    1. Re:Stupid headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does this writer hate Amazon? There is only one reason to say that the file was on an Amazon server and that is to make the readers think that Amazon servers are unsecure.

      I don't think there was an anti-Amazon agenda or an attempt to blame Amazon. I think the author was just pointing out that this data wasn't found on some government server but on a server used by tens of thousands of companies.

    2. Re: Stupid headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why did you go with incompetant rather than intentionally malicious?
      After that Bulgarian reporter uncovered the CIA shipping arms to designated terrorist groups, anyone with US top secret clearance is fair game now.

  14. Another failure of big government. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once again we witness how governments should not be in IT. Why don't they outsource this kind of thing to Amazon or Google or something like that? Those companies know what they are doing.

    1. Re:Another failure of big government. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Once again we witness how governments should not be in IT. Why don't they outsource this kind of thing to Amazon or Google or something like that? Those companies know what they are doing.

      Wrong. The problem is the over-use of contractors and constant outsourcing of everything.

      In this case, for example, all of this data should have been on a server controlled and accessed only by employees of the relevant government agency. Instead, nobody wants to be bothered doing any actual work. So, the government outsourced work to TigerSwan, who outsourced it to TalentPen, Each new layer of middlemen that you add significantly increases the chance that someone will screw something up.

    2. Re:Another failure of big government. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, the government outsourced work to TigerSwan, who outsourced it to TalentPen, Each new layer of middlemen that you add significantly increases the chance that someone will screw something up.

      But at least we get more accountability and lower costs for each extra layer of obfuscation, right? Right?

      That's the whole point of privatizing government functions, to get greater responsiveness and lower costs through more efficient vendors, right? Right?

      Riiiight...

    3. Re:Another failure of big government. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think the government could do a better job, you're an idiot. And as for blaming contractors, that is the common denominator for nearly every government fuck up, because contractors rarely push back...you don't argue with your customer, so they'll often fall on their sword publically. I've been on both sides of this equation for many years...more often than not, it's a govey who screwed the pooch.

  15. Just for the record... by edibobb · · Score: 4, Informative

    Amazon is not the one responsible for this. It's the idiot who didn't bother to secure the data. Amazon just gets attention in the headline.

    1. Re:Just for the record... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The company was of course responsible but so is also Amazon, they could have made it so that buckets that contain classified data can't be accessed without authorization.

    2. Re:Just for the record... by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2

      The company was of course responsible but so is also Amazon, they could have made it so that buckets that contain classified data can't be accessed without authorization.

      Someone mis-configured their bucket. Amazon has no way of knowing this or that the information is classified. Do you really think someone is going to tell them "Hey, we're putting a bunch of classified information on your servers, could you keep an eye on it for us?"

    3. Re: Just for the record... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a standard for classified documents ranging from just classified to top secret. Amazon could easily disable access when such document is found.

    4. Re:Just for the record... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they do. Checking whether a bucket is entirely publicly accessible is a configuration setting in the S3 bucket, and in IAM accounts or roles which that same client may own. And they do notify clients of publicly exposed buckets. It's not a *frequent* notification, but I've gotten them.

    5. Re:Just for the record... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The default security on any new S3 bucket allows access ONLY to the owner of the AWS account that created it. Someone with access to the account that owns the bucket had to deliberately change the security to make it wide open. Classified data is not allowed in any public cloud, and Amazon's cloud infrastructure has no knowledge of what type of data anyone is storing, it's just bytes.

  16. Re:you should be happy about this by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

    All of you Wikileaks supporters should applaud the transparency created by this breach. If you dont, then you're a hypocrite

    I believe we should have more transparency. But that doesn't mean I have to believe everything should be transparent. The government needs to have some secrets. 99% of classified material shouldn't be classified, but the other 1% should be.

    Anyway, I don't see the big deal about this breach. I had a "top secret" clearance for more than a decade. The government hands them out like candy corn on Halloween, and you can just assume that any tech within 100km of the Beltway likely has one.

    During the 10+ years I did defense work, I don't think I ever saw anything that made me go "Wow, it would be really bad if the commies knew about this!" It was mostly mundane stuff.

  17. No penalties for bad security. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    So long as there are no penalties for bad security, we will not have a concerted effort to always have good security.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  18. Re:you should be happy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

        I am SOOOooo fuckin' HAPPY!!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nabrmNTrBiU
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbZSe6N_BXs
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjpraGVs2Sg
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOWDb2TBYDg

    Dude, lighten up.

  19. Re:you should be happy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Leaking personal info about people with clearances is not the same thing as whistle blowing illegal government activities.

    That fact that you don't know the difference – or can't tell the difference – is telling. It explains a lot, IMO, about how some of you see false equivalences between, e.g. Black Lives Matter and the Nazis.

    So who's the hypocrite really? Off hand, I'd say it's you.

  20. 'Unsecured' ... not 'Insecure' by ClickOnThis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every time I hear the phrase 'insecure document' I die a little ... of laughter.

    An insecure document is a document that is harbouring feelings of self-doubt. 'Am I really a document? Do people like to read me? Does this file format make me look fat?'

    Folks, it's unsecured, not insecure. Yeah I know, it's probably too late to change this. But I just need to say it. There, I feel better now.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    1. Re:'Unsecured' ... not 'Insecure' by burtosis · · Score: 1

      Just wait till it's so overused it will literally be in Websters.

    2. Re:'Unsecured' ... not 'Insecure' by dcollins · · Score: 1

      As is commonly the case, the highly-upvoted snark about legacy language is dead wrong. It's already in Webster's:

      2: not adequately guarded or sustained : unsafe an insecure investment

      https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insecure

      (Side note: "The only modern dictionaries that trace their lineage to Noah Webster's are published by Merriam-Webster.", Wikipedia.)

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    3. Re:'Unsecured' ... not 'Insecure' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm feeling a tad unsecured.

    4. Re:'Unsecured' ... not 'Insecure' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good that I wasn't drinking coffee when I read that... Thanks for sharing that gem.

      (Personally I would have capitalized FAT, to start a format/filesystem troll, but then, that's just me.)

    5. Re: 'Unsecured' ... not 'Insecure' by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Imho both terms can apply to software, but they mean different things.

      An application is unsecured if there is no intention or attempt to secure it. "The data was available in an unsecured S3 bucket, wide open the world."

      An application is insecure when there is intention and attempt to secure it, but that attempt fails due to a software bug or misconfiguration. "The data was available on an insecure 'private' server. At attacker executed a SQL injection attack and gained unauthorized access."

    6. Re:'Unsecured' ... not 'Insecure' by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That can be solved. Would you kindly step into this cell here so we can secure you properly?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:'Unsecured' ... not 'Insecure' by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Hush! If Tony Leondis reads this we'll get a movie about an insecure document!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:'Unsecured' ... not 'Insecure' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cute, but every dictionary proves you wrong.

  21. Predictable from outsourcing by McLae · · Score: 4, Interesting
    No company does what they are paid to do these days. It is outsourced to a company that outsources security that outsources to some fat kid laying in bed. Who hires an Indian in Mumbai to do the actual work. No surprise that something like accountability gets lost.

    And all to pretend to improve the bottom line.

    1. Re:Predictable from outsourcing by swm · · Score: 2

      Hitler: (screaming at his generals) You outsourced our security to a vendor who's servers are in Leningrad?!?!
      -- from an EFF Downfall parody

    2. Re:Predictable from outsourcing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe they even create temporary companies to be able to shift the blame easily

  22. Re: And THIS is why we MUST halt all Chinese Impor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, except for their wheat, their top notch sam, their top notch Rocket engines america buys and Lots of other top end products and Services.

  23. Article title not very accurate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It makes it sound like there was an attack on Amazon's infrastructure, when actually, this was a totally ordinary screwup by TalentPen.

  24. "Secret History of the KGB" by Mitrokhin by HBI · · Score: 2

    Read it. Understand that the US has always been easily penetrated at this level. We have no real security worth the name at the private sector contractor level.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    1. Re:"Secret History of the KGB" by Mitrokhin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasn't always that easy. Up until just a couple years before the OPM leak, people submitting forms to them sent their data directly to OPM. Then they changed it all to entry over a web interface. The lack of thought behind that leak was criminally negligent.

  25. Welcome to politics by HBI · · Score: 1

    You just summarized politics itself. Here are the actual facts on the ground:

    1) No one cares about this breach except the usual paranoids in the USG. They can up the tall tales of threat all they want, there's a certain limit to how much people with actual power will buy it.

    2) This issue is irrelevant from a mass media perspective. The common person doesn't care, so that angle is covered.

    So, therefore, from a contracting perspective, this is a non-issue. The auditors will bitch and moan but business will go on as usual. You have to show an actual impact to get anything done at this level.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    1. Re:Welcome to politics by doctorvo · · Score: 1

      This issue is irrelevant from a mass media perspective.

      As you may notice, the perspective of the mass media is becoming less and less relevant.

      So, therefore, from a contracting perspective, this is a non-issue.

      Short term, it may seem that way. Long term, the trust of Americans in the federal government is eroding, year after year.

  26. cali KGB is back baby by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Brazil, Dilma Russef and Lula da Silva created a cyber group that spies on the police and on specific people. They are linked with arms, drugs and slavery. Thy already are very big, so hurry up motherfucker. They like to blame other people, so they have a lot of proxy.

  27. Loose lips sink Lockheed profits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shh, buddy. "Mundane stuff" isn't good enough to justify $0.8 trillion/year in defense spending.

    To sell this to the public, we need a shroud of "top secret" mystery, evil enemies attacking our democracy, and ideally even some kinda Russia collusion!
    (cause the goat-fuckers in Afghani caves just aren't cutting it).

  28. "TigerSwan" and "TalentPen"? by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

    "TigerSwan" and "TalentPen"? Really?

    Aren't those the names of the newer black-ops programs from the next Jason Bourne movie, now that they are fully finished with "Treadstone" and "Blackbriar"?

    1. Re:"TigerSwan" and "TalentPen"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good. There is still time. We're not at YakStream phase yet.

      The NWO dystopia will be complete when they get to ZebraZebu.

      P.S. The jade monkey never blinks.

  29. We call these ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... weasel words.

    "At no time was there ever a data breach of any TigerSwan server"

    Technically correct. But completely misleading.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  30. No disagreement by HBI · · Score: 1

    I'm just illustrating the point of view of the powers that be. Understanding it doesn't signal agreement.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  31. Re: News from Pyongyang Makerspace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We love this project! Just ordered 50 sets of parts for the boys and girls to play with, including the optional countdown timers with big red digits BUT Adafruit, Sparkfun and the rest have no plutonium in stock and told our agents it's very unlikely they'll be able to get any more (Health & Safety or some other bureaucracy hindering the Maker community as usual).

    You probably know and our scientists confirmed, even under torture, that plutonium is an essential part of the device. We tried everywhere from Alibaba and Amazon to Zod's Killing Supplies without success so we'd be grateful if you'd provide us with a source. Could you tell us where Comrade Kim gets his, if it's not a trade secret?

    Best wishes (unless you cross us),

    World Domination Inc
    (Please note that we have no connection to Elon Musk)

  32. Re: you should be happy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aweeeee... Bu-but it was HER TURN!!

    You lost. Get over it already, dipshit.

  33. State department, contractors, and cloud computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know what else to say.

  34. Re: News from Pyongyang Makerspace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Plutonium is readily available on the dark web. Be aware that this stuff is VERY dangerous and may be illegal in your country. I am not responsible for how you use this information.

    If you are skilled at using Tor, follow the instructions in the following video - AT YOUR OWN RISK.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1w8j7jSLsrs

  35. INACTIVE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, maybe what is old is new again, those active duty back so far there was no such thing as Amazon, still know my craft, but nobody knows me or my home address. I can pass a real security clearance all the way back to birth and I am not fat or drunk, the only problem is I wouldn't work for government again, unless it's to arrest people for treason.

  36. TigerSwan is shit by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

    No security company that blames security breaches on its own subcontractor is worse shit. It demonstrates that they are useless for any real-world security. Everyone deals with subcontractors. If you can't verify their security, you are worthless.

    1. Re:TigerSwan is shit by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      ... worse shit

      That's supposed to be worth shit.

  37. Re: you should be happy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nazis are EVERYWHERE! There's one under my bed right now!

  38. Re:you should be happy about this by gravewax · · Score: 1

    great show of ignorance. Their are things that the government SHOULD be keeping secret/secure and things that they should not ever be allowed to hide. private details of individuals, especially of security clearance levels is something that should ALWAYS be secured and I think you would find even WikiLeaks would censor that data before releasing it.

  39. Enough of the "Top Secret" bullshit already. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    I've held plenty of clearances, going back over 20 years. At NO point during my service or debriefs from leaving jobs that required clearances was it deemed illegal or even discouraged to list my work on a resume, also known as that unclassified document you share with anyone and everyone you might want to work for all throughout your life.

    Was sensitive information leaked? Application documents included drivers license info, passport numbers, and some SSN data. Yes, I'd say some PII was not protected well. But enough of this "Top Secret" bullshit hype. Gathering a list of U.S. Citizens who hold Top Secret clearances would probably take about 30 seconds on LinkedIn, also known as that public website that specializes in whoring out out your curriculum vitae.

  40. Re: you should be happy about this by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Wait, I can explain, that's just a ... erhm ... friend, and he has a SS uniform fetish for BDSM play that... oh. You meant YOUR bed.

    Ok, never mind, carry on.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  41. Live by... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    Live by the cloud, die by the cloud.

    The "cloud" is just some machine(s) somewhere that you have no security control over, that you have no reliability control over, that you have no maintenance control over, that you have no connectivity control over, that some marketing weasel somewhere (who you also have no control over) has convinced you is "better", when there's absolutely no concrete assurance of that.

    You use "the cloud" for anything critical, you're a fool. It's a fad. A dangerous fad. Sure, you might save a few bucks up front over a proper server or servers and the people required to keep said hardware and software up, secure and running properly, but eventually, it'll very likely bite you because the model is inherently flawed: The interest in and concern for your work which only you have has been firmly separated from the control of your work, which only they have. The more critical your data / processes, the harder you're likely to get bitten. In the meantime, you're eroding the pool of qualified people who can actually keep your data and processes safe and operating. One tiny win followed by a series of avalanching losses.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    1. Re:Live by... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mainframes aren't a fad. They've existed since the dawn of the computing industry. Just because they're sometimes called clouds doesn't change anything about what they actually are.

    2. Re:Live by... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Mainframes aren't a fad. They've existed since the dawn of the computing industry. Just because they're sometimes called clouds doesn't change anything about what they actually are.

      It changes things because the morons being marketed to don't understand the risks that they're taking when they outsource their private internal data.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  42. Of course, but that's not the point by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    Amazon S3 is used for content hosting for public web sites; of course, there are public buckets.

    There's a public square in most conventional towns. Doesn't mean anyone with a lick of common sense goes out there dragging bags of money with them.

    If your stuff needs security, you don't put it somewhere that has no security.

    If your stuff needs security, and you hire someone who knows nothing about security to manage it, it's your fault.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  43. This is an act of war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone knows that leaking USG workers info puts them in danger and these leakers "have blood in their hands". The USG should just drone them.

  44. Nothing New by sdinfoserv · · Score: 1

    Every single individual with Top Secret clearance has already been exposed with the OPM breach (2012-2015). OPM (Office Of Personal Management) suffered a successful spear fishing breach in which the personal information of every single current and past federal worker's (including all military and those who've applied for the Top Secret clearance) stolen. The number of individuals exposed exceed 21 million. The lost information included the 127 page personal questionnaire required for clearance evaluation.
    Essentially, every single US spy had their personal information - including secrets that could be used for blackmail - stolen and sold to foreign governments.
    The OPM breach makes every other data theft look trivial in comparison. The fact that the main storing house for all Federal information did not keep PIN encrypted at rest is greatly telling and disturbing.

  45. WRONG... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russia's INCREDIBLY rich in natural resources http://www.bing.com/search?q=russia+natural+resources+list&qs=AS&pq=%22russia+natural+resources&sk=AS1SC1&sc=8-25&cvid=D7E80F6184BE4F27A4B3644B918EADA6&FORM=QBLH&sp=3/ & I've heard tell that they even have MORE than Africa itself as well!

    APK

    P.S.=> Guys like you should "look before you leap" & speak... apk

  46. having a clearance isn't classified info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can put that you have a clearance on your resume, if you want.
    Some people are a bit more cagey - they put something like "SSBI on MM/YY" or "full scope poly on MM/YY"
    And employers generally put "clearable" or "had SSBI in last 3 years" or something like that in their requisition. And that's just to reduce the flood of resumes, because as soon as your resume comes in, they can just go look you up in one of the official databases (e.g. JPAS) and see what clearance you really have.

    Millions of people have clearances, and I'm sure there are essentially open lists (perhaps they're For Official Use Only FOUO, but you know).

    Someone who is looking for potential "converts to the cause" or "mercenary thieves" or whatever is going to
    a) care more about other access than a S or TS
    b) care more about specifically *where* you work and what access you might have

    Oh, you're an underpaid file clerk handling design documents for spy satellites? We know who makes such satellites, we know where the people who work there live and play, we go there and just wait to find someone who looks ripe for the picking. Then a suitable approach, whether false flag, or sticking it to the man, or that professional colleague working on their masters, or that cute boy/girl, or whatever.

  47. In a universe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where shit happens??? Computer security is a pointless exercise in futility.

  48. First of all. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No public cloud may be used to hold US classified data, period. Not even Amazon's US-government-exclusive GovCloud region is permitted for such use. At most, it can be used for "SBU" - Sensitive But Unclassified - data. If any of the data involved in this incident was actually classified, then the shitstorm is just beginning for these contractors, whether the data was protected or not.

  49. Re:you should be happy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly, and this is the kind of thing that puts people's lives at risk. If you think we shouldn't have intelligence agencies, then you're just a moron. And if you think the people who work there should be exposed, your a dangerous moron.

  50. OPM isn't a contractor level thing by HBI · · Score: 1

    OPM is run by the USG itself. (should be) a big difference. What Boeing, Northrop Grumman or General Dynamics do is one thing...and not very good. What the USG does itself is quite another.

    No argument with the criminal negligence involved in the OPM leak.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.