Quote:
Originally Posted by jammies
I have to say that my understanding (and a random sampling of documents that I read) of the leak was that it was all about past tactical military operations in Afghanistan and didn't include details of intelligence gathering with attached names of assets; I don't condone publishing the latter and don't think it's a moral practice to publish such data that SHOULD be secret. Wikileaks should have been much more selective in what was published, no doubt.
The US government seems a little lax in securing their data as well, as it should be common practice to use code names for informants and not their real names. These are compilations of reports that are presumably forwarded from field units up the chain of command and back to the States - how many clerks, data entry people, and other personnel see these names in clear every day? That is simply terrible operational security.
|
I read a book awhile ago called "Government 2.0" and while it wasn't particularly good there was a terrifying chapter on the ineptitude way in which government protects access to their data.
And if I remember, it wasn't just data but alot of government firewalls and security on things like automated hydroelectric dams were basically child-play for an experience hacker. Essentially the book said that something like the scenario in Die Hard 4 wasn't all that implausible.
http://www.amazon.ca/Government-2-0-...0428577&sr=8-1