I noticed some changes in e-services en re OPSEC. Look like it will now require approval.
Like???
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on December 04, 2007, 06:53:36 AM
Like???
Perhaps I don't know like "approval" as Major Carrales noted in the original post. ;)
Quote from: Major Carrales on December 04, 2007, 06:34:36 AM
I noticed some changes in e-services en re OPSEC. Look like it will now require approval.
Wow.....now we needs approved for our wasting time. Anyone else agree that the presentation was pure crap?
Did I just violate OPSEC by letting everyone know how lame the OPSEC Webinet based class was? Lets ask AF to borrow their 25 minute presentation to give. It is far more interesting and informative.
I don't understand why it needs to be approved. The member either sat there for 6 minutes and watched that stupid video or they didn't and E-services already shows who didn't.
In the commander's corner on eservices, there is a link to a webpage that states, part, "Starting 1 April 2008, members who have not completed the OPSEC training will not be able to access eServices until it has been completed."
How's this for an OPSEC change :) (See attached)
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 04, 2007, 06:20:11 PM
How's this for an OPSEC change :) (See attached)
Cadets taking OPSEC, good idea imho.
This seems to be a well thought out plan. I like the fact that it can be done two ways. Quite frankly, it is much better for my squadron to teach OPSEC as a class and have everything added into eServices.
I wonder if they will do this for GES as well.
Quote from: Tubacap on December 04, 2007, 06:44:32 PM
This seems to be a well thought out plan. I like the fact that it can be done two ways. Quite frankly, it is much better for my squadron to teach OPSEC as a class and have everything added into eServices.
I wonder if they will do this for GES as well.
We've been discussing it in another thread. We taught GES as a class and are having them sit and take the test on some laptops we have. I recently found out you can still order the paper test and have them take it that way, but I'm not sure about putting them into eservices.
Quote from: stillamarine on December 04, 2007, 06:28:55 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 04, 2007, 06:20:11 PM
How's this for an OPSEC change :) (See attached)
Cadets taking OPSEC, good idea imho.
I did. I think its a really darn good idea for them to take it. Cadets are the ones who are more likely to brag about what they do in CAP and show off their knowledge and information to their friends.
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 04, 2007, 05:08:17 PM
Quote from: Major Carrales on December 04, 2007, 06:34:36 AM
I noticed some changes in e-services en re OPSEC. Look like it will now require approval.
Wow.....now we needs approved for our wasting time. Anyone else agree that the presentation was pure crap?
Did I just violate OPSEC by letting everyone know how lame the OPSEC Webinet based class was? Lets ask AF to borrow their 25 minute presentation to give. It is far more interesting and informative.
I don't understand why it needs to be approved. The member either sat there for 6 minutes and watched that stupid video or they didn't and E-services already shows who didn't.
Funny, I could not disagree more. Granted, once I was a senior member and took it, most of it seemed obvious, but I've known examples like past senior members that were huge into HAM that did not keep our frequencies confidential, for example. If a 5-15 minute look at a presentation can cut down on that, good.
In addition, it is good training for cadets to have.
There is nothing in that announcement that indicates that a commander must "approve" the fact that someone took OPSEC. From what I understand, if you haven't taken OPSEC by that date your access to e-services will just be automatically blocked.
^ Because frequencies and privileged information is available in e-services to the average member right?
Perhaps NHQ should follow their own lead and make access to E-services more restrictive and put steps in place there to make sure no one but those "That have need" can access whats there.
Military does it.......you can have an AKO/NKO/AF Portal account with limited access to only your areas of responsibility.
OPSEC starts at the top, not at the bottom.
Actually, they do restricted access to whats available, those nice little restricted applications. As well, unfortunately all senior members do have access to privileged information as they have access to CAPWATCH for their unit in addition to Member Search with the same scope. As well, this isnt just restricted to eServices, it also clearly mentioned WMIRS and other systems which require a unique login which one can reasonably assume includes the NTC site (restricted portion) which does list frequencies.
I read that letter from National. Myissue is I still have members that havent done the OPSEC and since they dont participate in ES they really dont care about it. Ihave told them they need to do it, but they never seem to get around to it. I habe members that have been on my roster since 1992 that havent done OPSEC training yet
If it's imperative that it gets done by everyone, them maybe it is time to start dis-enrolling (to use an Auxiliary term) those who fail to complete it before the drop deadline?
If I did that, my Squadron would have three members in it.
Thats the point.
I've been fighting this battle since it first came out, and actually had a couple people quit over it. My feeling is: If you can't take 5 minutes to do this small thing, how can I depend on you to do any other job you are assigned? If they won't do it, make them Patron members and the only thing they can attend is an OPSEC breifing or the Wing/Squadron Christmas party... JMHO
Quote from: Al Sayre on December 05, 2007, 05:29:15 PM
and the only thing they can attend is an OPSEC breifing or the Wing/Squadron Christmas party... JMHO
Ah NO......they can't attend the X-mas party, someone there may want to talk "shop" and we can't have non-opsec cleared persons around. In fact, we should halt all X-mas (holiday) parties due to opsec.
Quote from: Al Sayre on December 05, 2007, 05:29:15 PM
I've been fighting this battle since it first came out, and actually had a couple people quit over it. My feeling is: If you can't take 5 minutes to do this small thing, how can I depend on you to do any other job you are assigned? If they won't do it, make them Patron members and the only thing they can attend is an OPSEC briefing or the Wing/Squadron Christmas party... JMHO
You seriously had people quit over an NDA? You're right, better for us they are gone.
It is amazing the mindset of some of our members - they wail and gnash teeth about not enough missions / respect, and then get whiny when they are asked to step up and start acting like the "professionals" they purport themselves to be.
Yep, actually lost 3 of 'em. They were offended that the WG/CC threatened to move everyone who didn't do it to the inactive squadron... Not like they were contributing much anyway, and it really didn't hurt my feelings to see them go.
Does your Sq. have a computer with internet?
when we get a new member, we sit them down in front of the computer and do CPPT and OPSEC with them. It doesnt take long, and its done. I cant believe you have 15 year members who havnt done OPSEC???? How do they even participate in the program? Surely they arent productive members?
You have to get them to a meeting first... I have several on the books with >10 yrs membership who I've never even seen, and I've been the SQ/CC for 1 yr & 8 mos.
Quote from: Al Sayre on December 05, 2007, 07:03:35 PM
You have to get them to a meeting first... I have several on the books with >10 yrs membership who I've never even seen, and I've been the SQ/CC for 1 yr & 8 mos.
Time to start pushing them to your 000 squadron (unless they are paying local dues or something).
Odds are they won't even notice - although any member who hasn't shown for 10 years won't care / doesn't even know, about eServices access anyway.
I agree, but the receiving Commander must initiate the transfer, and right now that ain't gonna happen....
Quote from: Flying Pig on December 05, 2007, 06:53:15 PM
Does your Sq. have a computer with internet?
when we get a new member, we sit them down in front of the computer and do CPPT and OPSEC with them. It doesnt take long, and its done. I cant believe you have 15 year members who havnt done OPSEC???? How do they even participate in the program? Surely they arent productive members?
If you're not participating in ES, the WMU or eServices is almost unnecessary to participation for other than a commander, and then they only need it for promotions and PD.
Quote from: Al Sayre on December 05, 2007, 08:27:28 PM
I agree, but the receiving Commander must initiate the transfer, and right now that ain't gonna happen....
I can't speak for your wing, but here I simply sent the Wing personnel Officer a spreadsheet of the 000's and the next day it was done.
OK, I thought you were talking about members who attend and who havnt done OPSEC. If you have members who havnt been at a meeting for 10+ years, who cares. Let them keep sending in their dues every year and move on. My father is that way. He has not been active in CAP for 10 + years, but when the bill comes, he sends a check. He still likes keeping his foot in the door and likes getting the Volunteer Magazine. It doesnt hurt a soul that he doesnt go to meetings, or that he hasn't done OPSEC. Many people have good intentions about getting back active, but life just gets in the way. i was out for almost 4 years, and couldnt believe the amount of time that had passed when I actually saw my inactive date.
Quote from: Flying Pig on December 05, 2007, 08:55:35 PM
OK, I thought you were talking about members who attend and who havnt done OPSEC. If you have members who havnt been at a meeting for 10+ years, who cares. Let them keep sending in their dues every year and move on. My father is that way. He has not been active in CAP for 10 + years, but when the bill comes, he sends a check. He still likes keeping his foot in the door and likes getting the Volunteer Magazine. It doesnt hurt a soul that he doesnt go to meetings, or that he hasn't done OPSEC. Many people have good intentions about getting back active, but life just gets in the way. i was out for almost 4 years, and couldnt believe the amount of time that had passed when I actually saw my inactive date.
Right - there are lots of members like that, based on COl. Hodgkins comments at the NEC, probably too many because when we report our readiness to Congress, etc., we don't' necessarily distinguish active versus non-active.
Pushing them to 000 fixes that, and relieves the local unit of the responsibility for the members' jackets, etc., while still maintaining any wing dues in that local wing.
Quote from: Al Sayre on December 05, 2007, 08:27:28 PM
I agree, but the receiving Commander must initiate the transfer, and right now that ain't gonna happen....
My home squadron was constantly transferring inactives to 000. Don't think we ever asked first.
Quote from: RiverAux on December 05, 2007, 11:14:44 PM
Quote from: Al Sayre on December 05, 2007, 08:27:28 PM
I agree, but the receiving Commander must initiate the transfer, and right now that ain't gonna happen....
My home squadron was constantly transferring inactives to 000. Don't think we ever asked first.
In the past, when transfers were mainly done via hardcopy, this was the practice of many unit CC's - I don't NHQ gave much scrutiny to transfers.
At this point, though, I don't even know if they are honoring hardcopy xfers anymore.
I took the OPSEC a good while before it was required. It is fairly quick, and is a good idea for cadets. Especially the way some of them like to brag...
Quote from: thp on December 06, 2007, 01:03:45 AM
I took the OPSEC a good while before it was required. It is fairly quick, and is a good idea for cadets. Especially the way some of them like to brag...
That's been my concern from day 1 about this - the exact members most likely to call mom, or text all their friends with "guess where I just saw Air Force 1", are the same members who were not required to complete the training.
So is this a way for CAP to show the members that they aren't screwing around, and really do require members to take this training? What's so hard about reading some slides that take about 20 minutes tops? I'm glad that NHQ is cracking down about this, and hope that members will take our training more serious. But that's just me.
Quote from: Eclipse on December 06, 2007, 01:09:43 AM
Quote from: thp on December 06, 2007, 01:03:45 AM
I took the OPSEC a good while before it was required. It is fairly quick, and is a good idea for cadets. Especially the way some of them like to brag...
That's been my concern from day 1 about this - the exact members most likely to call mom, or text all their friends with "guess where I just saw Air Force 1", are the same members who were not required to complete the training.
But he already bragged about taking OPSEC training. It can go both ways.
I can't believe this is such a big deal for some members. It takes no more than 10 minutes of your time and isn't exactly a brain buster... ???
Quote from: Eclipse on December 06, 2007, 12:54:36 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on December 05, 2007, 11:14:44 PM
Quote from: Al Sayre on December 05, 2007, 08:27:28 PM
I agree, but the receiving Commander must initiate the transfer, and right now that ain't gonna happen....
My home squadron was constantly transferring inactives to 000. Don't think we ever asked first.
In the past, when transfers were mainly done via hardcopy, this was the practice of many unit CC's - I don't NHQ gave much scrutiny to transfers.
At this point, though, I don't even know if they are honoring hardcopy xfers anymore.
Some transfers still require paper, like transferring in a Patron member.
We had a guy in my last squadron who refused to do the OPSEC training. I don't know what his exact problem was. He had internet access and the squadron commander kept telling him he needed to do it. He just wouldn't. I should find out if he ever did or what happened to him. I think that this change is long overdue but I don't think that an online powerpoint presentation is the way to go. I like the idea of sitting down with people, going over the slides and actually training them on what the stuff means. In the military, it's something that everyone gets trained in. The old Navy term of "Loose lips sinks ships" is, from what I hear, drilled into every Navy recruits head. Most people that don't want to do it will joke about it but it is really a very serious matter, considering the missions that we currently perform. I'm not a pilot, but I don't think that I would want certain groups knowing what our aircraft look like, where they are parked, etc. Just food for thought.
Quote from: SarDragon on December 06, 2007, 02:26:38 AM
Some transfers still require paper, like transferring in a Patron member.
Its not worth arguing about, but I just did some in the last couple of weeks without paper...
Quote from: MIKE on December 06, 2007, 01:21:52 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on December 06, 2007, 01:09:43 AM
Quote from: thp on December 06, 2007, 01:03:45 AM
I took the OPSEC a good while before it was required. It is fairly quick, and is a good idea for cadets. Especially the way some of them like to brag...
That's been my concern from day 1 about this - the exact members most likely to call mom, or text all their friends with "guess where I just saw Air Force 1", are the same members who were not required to complete the training.
But he already bragged about taking OPSEC training. It can go both ways.
True - the NDA does not equal duct tape, however its also not fair to hold members responsible for something they have never indicated they understand.
If they nod their heads yes, then do something dumb (or dangerous), we have the means internally to address remediation, ranging from the 3000psi pointed finger all the way to revocation of ES qualifications and participation until attitudes are adjusted.
One can make the argument that OPSEC is just common sense, we all know how that goes, and if we've never told people specifically to "knock it off", its not fair to act as if we did .
My own experience on the common sense side includes a situation with an actual mission involving a missing aircraft.
We had a full mission base staff ramped up, including a fully qualified IO who was interacting appropriately with the local press - wasn't he flabbergasted to see someone with advanced grade on the phone with his private employer, who also turned out to be local media, giving specific details of the situation, the search area, etc.
This is in the early net days before Blackberries and universal texting, and was being done by an adult with 25+ years in CAP.
Heh, a finger was definitely pointed.
As to the issue of minors and an NDA, it might not be legally enforceable outside CAP, however I suppose an argument could be made that we already entrust our cadets with responsibilities about those of "regular" minors, and this is an extension of the responsibility.
^ So can a CAP member be sued by NHQ for breach of the NDA? Or would it fall into just being dismissed?
Quote from: Eclipse on December 06, 2007, 06:40:47 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on December 06, 2007, 02:26:38 AM
Some transfers still require paper, like transferring in a Patron member.
Its not worth arguing about, but I just did some in the last couple of weeks without paper...
Right, you do have to use a form, but that form can be electronic.
Quote from: mikeylikey on December 06, 2007, 06:54:19 PM
^ So can a CAP member be sued by NHQ for breach of the NDA? Or would it fall into just being dismissed?
They have to show monetary damages.
I suppose if NHQ were getting sued for damages, and the complaint stemmed from an internal breach of regulation, NHQ could either petition for dismissal and point at you, or come after the trial to recoup their losses.
IMHO it would have to be an extreme breach with big dollars.
Gets back to the whole "follow the rules to avoid liability nightmare scenarios we are always arguing about.