Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate
Yawn. I see that you have, once again, failed to address the actual question being asked.
Nor, for that matter, do you refute a specific example given that contradicts your earlier assertions.
Many soldiers and government employees are instructed that anything that they learn that common sense would suggest that might be classified should be treated as if it were classified until informed otherwise by competent authority.
Additionally, consider that, quite often, information that may later be classified is often first learned or created by someone who has no authority to officially classify the information as classified. Yet the person who first learns or creates the information must keep that information secret, unless otherwise instructed by a competent authority.
If you work in the US government (and I have no idea if you do, nor do I really care), then presumably you would already be aware of this commentary and extensions of it.
Or perhaps you don't, and you just get your information from the "kindercare that is Wikipedia."
|
You don't have a clue what you are talking about. Please, for your own sake, read the last link in my response to Ernie. It is an executive order that restates what all public servants are required to understand about information and information handling.
I'll try and make this really really easy for you to understand. Because government employees are public servants all the things they do are subject to public oversight. That is ALL departments of government, even the military, CIA and NSA. All information generated is considered unclassified until a classification label is attached to the document by an appropriate classification authority. For Top Secret, Those authorities are normally agency heads. That is how difficult it is to have a document classified at that level. Many times people that were involved in certain incidents may not even know information that passed across their desk has been assigned a sensitivity label unless they remain active in working that event. This isn't something the government goes and advertises.
Your employee example is specious. Soldiers, government employees of all types, and contractors are made well aware of the open nature of government work and told that they have no right to privacy because of the open government mandate. They receive this information at their employee orientation or induction and then hear it again during regular security training, where they sign an acknowledgement of all appropriate policies, including data classification and handing standards. This is a directive affecting all departments because of the open government mandate. Most people may handle information on a daily basis that could become classified at a later date, depending on circumstances.
Here is an example of this process in action. A particular hacker group is well known and a dossier is developed by a particular department. This dossier is likely to filled with mails and information about actors involved. This information, especially the emails, does not have a data classification because of the open government mandate. While investigating the group it is discovered that some of these actors may be involved in a plot to attack key infrastructure systems. At that point it is highly likely a data classification wi be assigned to the dossier, especially if there are details in there about the actions being taken against them. Prior to the discovery of this information, and the assignment of the label, this data is unclassified and available via a FOI submission (possible redaction for certain details). After the label is applied different rules apply and the information available through the FOI is limited. Depending on the label the request to release that information may be refused altogether. Data that was once available for release then becomes unreleasable because of the change in sensitivity label and handling requirements. This is something that all department have to deal with and many of them are now employing compliance officers in some capacity.