Browsing Wikileaks bad for your CAP health?

[N Harmon]

This may be way paranoid, or maybe not at all. I have been hearing from several people who are in the military, or work in government that they are being told not to browse any of the classified material that is being made public on the internet. That simply because it is out there, does not entitle them access to it.

And given that there are a number of CAP volunteers who either have security clearances or are, at some level, privy to sensitive information through various missions (HLS, CN, intercept, etc), I wonder how it might affect the trust placed in CAP members if they did what the real military and government are being told not to do.

(Let's keep the discussion on how this might affect CAP members, and not on the circumstances surrounding the leaks themselves)

[JayT]

This may be way paranoid, or maybe not at all. I have been hearing from several people who are in the military, or work in government that they are being told not to browse any of the classified material that is being made public on the internet. That simply because it is out there, does not entitle them access to it.

And given that there are a number of CAP volunteers who either have security clearances or are, at some level, privy to sensitive information through various missions (HLS, CN, intercept, etc), I wonder how it might affect the trust placed in CAP members if they did what the real military and government are being told not to do.

(Let's keep the discussion on how this might affect CAP members, and not on the circumstances surrounding the leaks themselves)

This is still America, right? If someone whats to view the material, they have that right. However, of course, they also have to accept the consequences of their choices.

[Hawk200]

Many people believe that because something is on the Internet, then they're cleared to view it. It doesn't work that way.

Security clearances only allow access to documents where you have a need to know. There are people with Top Secret clearances that do not have access to Secret material.

I don't know if the government is actively seeking anyone who accesses Wikileaks, but I don't think it really matters, it shouldn't be accessed anyway if you don't need to see it.

For CAP members, I don't really know what kind of repercussions there might be for viewing the material. Any penalties for accessing the material is up to whatever agency is responsible for the information.

[Spaceman3750]

I refuse to visit wikileaks because I don't want to be implicated in any log analysis that could be done if some government seizes the site. I also respect the fact that leaked classified info is still classified and I'm not cleared.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

I don't know about USAF or USMC or USN but the Army definitely has a policy that anyone viewing leaked classified information for any reason other than to report the classified information to authority as leaked or compromised will be held accountable to fullest extent of the UCMJ. I would imagine that that would be policy of all branches.

[Major Lord]

I believe that there is an order for DOD members to not read Wikileak, but it would clearly not apply to most CAP members. Even if by some chance the Federal Government would be crazy enough to clear a CAP member for a new or higher clearance, I think that reading a web page about politics could be pretty easily explained. (As opposed to say, spending time on a Jihadi websites, bomb making websites, or kiddie porn) I don't think Julian Assange is a member of OZ's CAP, and I am glad I am not in his shoes, because I think he has opened a first class can of grade-one whoopass on himself and is likely to join the Vince Foster Association in the near future.

Major Lord

[SARDOC]

The issue isn't so much about reading classified materials...once classified materials have been compromised they are compromised.  Why shouldn't I be able to read them.  Is it so that I may not have information that a general member of the public or even my enemy has?  Reporters have used wikileaks as a source of information to publish in high profile articles in publications as the Guardian or the New York Times.  This doesn't mean that if you come upon sensitive information in a newspaper you should gouge out your eyes in the interest of National Security.

DoD has ordered servicemembers to not go to the actual wikileaks site because of all of the Cyberattacks that are originating and/or terminating in connection with that site.  Your computer and all information on which ever networks you may travel may be at risk including AKO, NKO and the like.

It should be recommended that you not visit wikileaks either...you can just pick up the newspaper and read it there without the headaches involved.  People are making much to do about nothing.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Just because the secrets have been stolen does not mean that they have been officially declassified.  My advice to everyone is to keep your computer's fingerprints off that site.  This battle is just beginning, and this situation has "Overreaction" written all over it.  Eric Holder is pretty stupid, but even a blind squirrell sometimes finds a nut.  If you get caught up in that you might end up in a federal prison, or at least in the poorhouse after paying a lot of attorney fees.

[NIN]

Classified materials that have not been declassified by the appropriate authorities are not automagically declassified just because they've been compromised.

Military personnel who hold a security clearance understand the requirements of their clearance and the concept of "need to know."   Just because you have classified material sitting in front of you does not mean that you get to read it, even if you hold, say, a SECRET clearance and the material is marked SECRET.

Bradley Manning must have been absent from class the day they taught that in AIT.  Perhaps while he's a guest of the US Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth he can be provided with some remedial training in the proper handling and dissemination of classified materials.

Consequently, military personnel who read WikiLeaks are reading classified materials that they have no legitimate authority to read (and thus, likely not a clear"need to know" under the restrictions of their clearance).

I got in a heap of trouble about 22 years ago for being signed for SECRET equipment while, at the time, I was only in possession of a CONFIDENTIAL clearance.  Thankfully, it was ascertained that: a) I'd been required to sign for the equipment, and the helicopter it was attached to, to ensure continued custody and security of the aircraft; and b) the unit security manager had ZERO controls in place to ensure that uncleared personnel didn't have responsibility for equipment above their clearance level.  Oops.

I was a little worried as an E-4 to get a phone call "Can you report to the Battalion Commander's office?"  (Hint: The word "no" is not really an option, even though it was phrased in the form of a question...<GRIN>)  Good thing the  Bn CDR and CSM knew me from my duties on the Bn color guard.  One of those times when my CAP background helped.

[cap235629]

Classified materials that have not been declassified by the appropriate authorities are not automagically declassified just because they've been compromised.

Military personnel who hold a security clearance understand the requirements of their clearance and the concept of "need to know."   Just because you have classified material sitting in front of you does not mean that you get to read it, even if you hold, say, a SECRET clearance and the material is marked SECRET.

Bradley Manning must have been absent from class the day they taught that in AIT.  Perhaps while he's a guest of the US Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth he can be provided with some remedial training in the proper handling and dissemination of classified materials.

Consequently, military personnel who read WikiLeaks are reading classified materials that they have no legitimate authority to read (and thus, likely not a clear"need to know" under the restrictions of their clearance).

I got in a heap of trouble about 22 years ago for being signed for SECRET equipment while, at the time, I was only in possession of a CONFIDENTIAL clearance.  Thankfully, it was ascertained that: a) I'd been required to sign for the equipment, and the helicopter it was attached to, to ensure continued custody and security of the aircraft; and b) the unit security manager had ZERO controls in place to ensure that uncleared personnel didn't have responsibility for equipment above their clearance level.  Oops.

I was a little worried as an E-4 to get a phone call "Can you report to the Battalion Commander's office?"  (Hint: The word "no" is not really an option, even though it was phrased in the form of a question...<GRIN>)  Good thing the  Bn CDR and CSM knew me from my duties on the Bn color guard.  One of those times when my CAP background helped.

Let me guess, the VINSON system? That time line places your incident AFTER Mr. Walker sold out to the Russians. Kinda makes you wonder what the big deal was huh?

[Rotorhead]

CAP members are not DoD employees.

Therefore, even if DoD employees were "ordered" not to visit the site (totally impractical to enforce), that would have no effect on CAP members. Civilians can't be ordered to do anything by the chain of command, nor does the UCMJ apply.

The idea that you could be prosecuted for viewing the material is laughable.

[tarheel gumby]

CAP members are not DoD employees.

Therefore, even if DoD employees were "ordered" not to visit the site (totally impractical to enforce), that would have no effect on CAP members. Civilians can't be ordered to do anything by the chain of command, nor does the UCMJ apply.

The idea that you could be prosecuted for viewing the material is laughable.

True, but it could affect your ability to renew if the FBI or Mr. Holder deem you to be questionable.

[Rotorhead]

CAP members are not DoD employees.

Therefore, even if DoD employees were "ordered" not to visit the site (totally impractical to enforce), that would have no effect on CAP members. Civilians can't be ordered to do anything by the chain of command, nor does the UCMJ apply.

The idea that you could be prosecuted for viewing the material is laughable.

True, but it could affect your ability to renew if the FBI or Mr. Holder deem you to be questionable.

If you want to worry about silliness like that, go ahead.

[JohnKachenmeister]

So... go there if you want.  Frankly, whether or not you get in trouble is YOUR decision, not mine.  Blab all the secrets you want, and tell Holder he can't do squat about it.

[JWilson]

I think that this is a interesting question and I have to agree with the sentiment that classified informationdoes not become declassified once it has been leaked. Information is classified for a reason.
However, while there is no standing order to avoid wikileaks I believe that it is a good idea to stay away from the website, a seizure of the logs by the government could yield the names of people who visited the website. Which could likely cause problems for a CAP member. But the likelihood of this happening is very small

And to julian assange: I hope you realize that the more elusive you make yourself, the more tempting of a target you make to black ops

[N Harmon]

From: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/08/AR2010120806796.html

Under the Adjudication Desk Reference, a guide published by the Defense Human Resources Activity that serves as a resource to personnel security adjudicators, investigators and managers, it notes in the "Handling Protected Information" section that deliberate or negligent failure to comply with rules and regulations for protecting classified information, or for protecting other sensitive information (such as for official use only, proprietary, export-controlled or privacy information), raises doubt about an individual's trustworthiness, judgment, reliability, or willingness and ability to safeguard such information and is a serious security concern.

(emphasis mine)

Here is the thing. Civil Air Patrol's reputation as being trustworthy is incumbent upon the trustworthiness and judgment of its individual members. And a lapse in judgment by any one member can have wider implications than just that person's membership. We have seen as much before, and there is no reason to believe it not to be the case now. So while neither CAP, nor the government can order you to not read stuff on that website, I think members do a great disservice by not showing a little discretion there. Sure, the chances of getting caught might be very low, but is that really an excuse for conduct that can affect the entire organization?

If we want CAP to continue to be entrusted with the things we do for the Air Force and other departments, and if we want that trust to continue to grow, then we should take a proactive stance in informing our membership, who may not have considered at all, the implications of accessing classified information on the internet related to national security. I am my unit's IT officer, and was considering reminding the squadron's membership of this. Given the replies here, I feel better about that being the right thing to do.

[Flying Pig]

I think that this is a interesting question and I have to agree with the sentiment that classified informationdoes not become declassified once it has been leaked. Information is classified for a reason.
However, while there is no standing order to avoid wikileaks I believe that it is a good idea to stay away from the website, a seizure of the logs by the government could yield the names of people who visited the website. Which could likely cause problems for a CAP member. But the likelihood of this happening is very small

And to julian assange: I hope you realize that the more elusive you make yourself, the more tempting of a target you make to black ops

Ummmm, yeah, OK.  He's in jail.  Dont get much more "elusive" than that I guess.

[RADIOMAN015]

From: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/08/AR2010120806796.html


(emphasis mine)

Here is the thing. Civil Air Patrol's reputation as being trustworthy is incumbent upon the trustworthiness and judgment of its individual members. And a lapse in judgment by any one member can have wider implications than just that person's membership. We have seen as much before, and there is no reason to believe it not to be the case now. So while neither CAP, nor the government can order you to not read stuff on that website, I think members do a great disservice by not showing a little discretion there. Sure, the chances of getting caught might be very low, but is that really an excuse for conduct that can affect the entire organization?

If we want CAP to continue to be entrusted with the things we do for the Air Force and other departments, and if we want that trust to continue to grow, then we should take a proactive stance in informing our membership, who may not have considered at all, the implications of accessing classified information on the internet related to national security. I am my unit's IT officer, and was considering reminding the squadron's membership of this. Given the replies here, I feel better about that being the right thing to do.

Wow you are just off the grid.  We are CIVIL Air Patrol, what an individual CIVILIAN member does legally WHILE not involved in a CAP sanctioned activity isn't ANYONE in CAP or the government's business .   I will give you this -- I wouldn't expect the members attending a CAP meeting to be tying up the squadron wireless LAN or using a CAP computer for these "searches" :angel:
RM

[DakRadz]

^^^^^^^^^^^

Says the man on a government pension.

[RADIOMAN015]

^^^^^^^^^^^

Says the man on a government pension.

Once the cats out of the bag, that's the way it is.   I'm being realistic about this, CAP has NO authority over the membership except at CAP meetings or other sanctioned CAP activities.  We don't need "anyone" overreaching these bounds.

Now as far as the alleged military member that released this information, yes he is likely in serious trouble that could get him a good 10 years in a military prison.  As far the individual who posted this information, I'm not sure what the law will prescribe for him, since it is likely the website will be considered a freedom of the press type issue.

I served in the military to protect America, BUT I also served to protect ALL our freedoms.  I really don't need some CAP mis guided military "wanna bees" telling me what I should or shouldn't be doing
RM         

[DakRadz]

Now as far as the alleged military member that released this information, yes he is likely in serious trouble that could get him a good 10 years in a military prison.

Treason is punishable by death. Technically; and I know it won't happen. Just sayin'. I have the freedom to wish vengefully.

I served in the military to protect America, BUT I also served to protect ALL our freedoms.  I really don't need some CAP mis guided military "wanna bees" telling me what I should or shouldn't be doing
RM       

But it's nice to have a heads-up.
Also, many points have been brought up as to why it's not really a great idea regardless of CAP status. Things I never would have thought about otherwise, yet still have a valid point. So.

Seriously, it seems like I'm the first person on page 2 in both the forums I frequent.

[Ron1319]

I'm having a hard time seeing how a government document classification could apply to me. 

[NCRblues]

I'm having a hard time seeing how a government document classification could apply to me.

It applies to you, because your an American citizen (and even if your not your in American jurisdiction) and you must follow ALL laws. Not the ones you like.....

The law says you cant look at this stuff, your not cleared, nor do you have a need to know...

[manfredvonrichthofen]

I served in the military to protect America, BUT I also served to protect ALL our freedoms.  I really don't need some CAP mis guided military "wanna bees" telling me what I should or shouldn't be doing
RM       

Ok then radioman, take it from me. It is against the law to read any document that is deemed classified, even FOUO, it is a federal crime. It doesn't matter if a CAP officer tells you not to look at it or not. The only time you can see a classified document is to return it when found to the nearest military post/armory.

[RADIOMAN015]

I served in the military to protect America, BUT I also served to protect ALL our freedoms.  I really don't need some CAP mis guided military "wanna bees" telling me what I should or shouldn't be doing
RM       

Ok then radioman, take it from me. It is against the law to read any document that is deemed classified, even FOUO, it is a federal crime. It doesn't matter if a CAP officer tells you not to look at it or not. The only time you can see a classified document is to return it when found to the nearest military post/armory.

Very highly doubtful that a civilian not associated with the military, looking at a third party site found with google is going to be prosecuted successfully because it isn't a crime.  HOWEVER, CAP members coming into direct contact with any classified information and releasing it likely could be prosecuted.  It's likely that CAP performs some missions that although not classified are considered sensitive and the members have signed a non disclosure agreement, they also could find themselves in deep trouble if it was released.

BTW I haven't even looked at the wiki leaks. Likely I won't even look no time...  What still amazes me is why that individual's supervisor didn't see him downloading all this material.  There's alot.    I should wouldn't want to be that supervisor or even the two levels above that, because likely they may have some career progression problems.
RM   

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Very highly doubtful that a civilian not associated with the military, looking at a third party site found with google is going to be prosecuted successfully because it isn't a crime.

Yeah, that is what they said about watching movies from Limewire. Look at them now, being prosecuted for downloading those movies and songs. Successfully too.

[FARRIER]

The Pentagon Papers during the 1970s. The same situation. Icant find it at the moment,  but the Supreme Court ruled that once the material was released...as RM said.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

The Pentagon Papers during the 1970s. The same situation. Icant find it at the moment,  but the Supreme Court ruled that once the material was released...as RM said.

That ruling was that once classified documents were released it is all cool, not leaked or stolen.

[NCRblues]

The Pentagon Papers during the 1970s. The same situation. Icant find it at the moment,  but the Supreme Court ruled that once the material was released...as RM said.

The supreme court ruled it must be properly released and cataloged into the library of congress. It can not be leaked, stolen, hijacked or any other crazy notion you can come up with.

Also, RM, it is a crime, but will never be prosecuted because well, lets be honest, what a waste of time to prosecute someone who reads it off google. Now the person who took them without permission..... i hope they hang him high....

[SARDOC]

The Pentagon Papers during the 1970s. The same situation. Icant find it at the moment,  but the Supreme Court ruled that once the material was released...as RM said.

That ruling was that once classified documents were released it is all cool, not leaked or stolen.

Not Quite...The Case in question is the New York Times Company v. United States (1971)   The Documents in this case were not "Released".  They were leaked to the NYTimes.  The Court case was that the government tried to order the paper not to print classified information with a restraining Order under the Espionage Act.  The NYTimes fought and had that ruled unconstitutional.  The Government Cannot censor the media or private citizens from disseminating Classified Information unless they are an agent of the government entrusted in keeping that sensitive information in the interest of National Security.  Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press were thought of as being pretty important hallmarks of a democracy...once upon a time.

[FARRIER]

I'm having a hard time seeing how a government document classification could apply to me.

It applies to you, because your an American citizen (and even if your not your in American jurisdiction) and you must follow ALL laws. Not the ones you like.....

The law says you cant look at this stuff, your not cleared, nor do you have a need to know...

Then explain how the reporters who wrote for the News got away with it. I dont think the information came out in book form originally.

[NCRblues]

I'm having a hard time seeing how a government document classification could apply to me.

It applies to you, because your an American citizen (and even if your not your in American jurisdiction) and you must follow ALL laws. Not the ones you like.....

The law says you cant look at this stuff, your not cleared, nor do you have a need to know...

Then explain how the reporters who wrote for the News got away with it. I dont think the information came out in book form originally.

Freedom of the press shall not be infringed. See post above yours.......

You would be actively seaking to look at and obtain national security sensitive documents.

[FARRIER]

Its the PFC that stold the documents. He's the one they should be threatning with the Espionage Act. The Press isn't just newspapers anymore, there is also the electronic media. China, with the participation of Google, blocked internet content. Google also helped in the monitoring. Because someone isn't reporting in the paper format, doesn't mean they are not the press.

I'm having a hard time seeing how a government document classification could apply to me.

It applies to you, because your an American citizen (and even if your not your in American jurisdiction) and you must follow ALL laws. Not the ones you like.....

The law says you cant look at this stuff, your not cleared, nor do you have a need to know...

Then explain how the reporters who wrote for the News got away with it. I dont think the information came out in book form originally.

Freedom of the press shall not be infringed. See post above yours.......

You would be actively seaking to look at and obtain national security sensitive documents.

[FlyTiger77]

I believe that DoD's major concern is keeping classified data off its unclassified network. In INFOSEC, this is deemed "spillage" and is a royal pain in the fourth point of contact. A person using an unclassified DoD system to view and download classified documents from WikiLeaks or any other source would cause spillage and be very unpopular in a number of places.

[JWilson]

I think that this is a interesting question and I have to agree with the sentiment that classified informationdoes not become declassified once it has been leaked. Information is classified for a reason.
However, while there is no standing order to avoid wikileaks I believe that it is a good idea to stay away from the website, a seizure of the logs by the government could yield the names of people who visited the website. Which could likely cause problems for a CAP member. But the likelihood of this happening is very small

And to julian assange: I hope you realize that the more elusive you make yourself, the more tempting of a target you and your organization make to black ops

Ummmm, yeah, OK.  He's in jail.  Dont get much more "elusive" than that I guess.

The women who are pressing charges said the would not have done so if he "had not been so elusive and difficult to contact"
By avoiding these women he garnered media attention, which no doubt garnered more interest from groups that would like to see him lose face.

[SARDOC]

The women who are pressing charges said the would not have done so if he "had not been so elusive and difficult to contact"
By avoiding these women he garnered media attention, which no doubt garnered more interest from groups that would like to see him lose face.

If I had a women pressing charges against me for whatever reason...I'd probably be elusive and avoid contact with them myself.  That's why he turned himself in to the police.