Company That Vetted Snowden Defends Work

[struggle4progress]

By Dion Nissenbaum

WASHINGTON—The private company that conducted the last background check of former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden said it was the federal government’s responsibility to catch any problems with its 2011 investigation ...

While USIS said it couldn’t “refute or verify” the government’s conclusions, the company said in a statement the federal government didn’t raise any concerns at the time about its work in February 2011 on the five-year “periodic reinvestigation” of Mr. Snowden. The company said the NSA, not USIS, was ultimately responsible for approving or denying Mr. Snowden’s security clearance ...

Federal officials started looking at the company’s practices in late 2011 after a fired USIS employee alleged that the company was cutting corners ... Earlier this summer, a federal grand jury opened a criminal investigation into USIS practices ...

http://stream.wsj.com/story/campaign-2012-continuous-coverage/SS-2-9156/SS-2-311647/

[Gravitycollapse]

1. Reminds me of the scene in Dr. Strangelove when they argue about the human reliability tests.

[struggle4progress]

6. It's more than human error IMO: it's a structural problem. The Republicans

have for years been pushing the idea that government is too big and key operations could efficiently be privatized. The net effect is to replace civil servants with much more expensive contract work that occurs behind a corporate liability shield. The responsible party ceases to be a particular employee or department and becomes some corporate contractor. The profit motive then almost guarantees cutting corners, and (in fact) the corporation has little incentive to replace employees who cut corners with those who don't. In case of problems, the corporation simply diffuses responsibility namelessly into the corporation, where no particular individual can actually be held accountable, since none of the records can be regarded as public documents and therefore require legal action to obtain. The government agency, meanwhile, has no real recourse, since the contractor is effectively "too big to fail" -- the agency has been stripped of material and personnel, so it lacks the resources to reclaim the responsibilities that have been contracted out, while the contractor is offering a specialty service for which there are few or no other "market" alternatives

[Gravitycollapse]

7. Have you seen Dr.Strangelove? The failure of the human reliability test is about more than error...

It is in fact exactly about a structural problem.

[struggle4progress]

9. You'll have to forgive me: it's been some decades since my last viewing of Strangelove

[struggle4progress]

2. Leaker's Security Check Faulted

August 27, 2013, 8:12 p.m. ET
Review of Former NSA Contractor Snowden Found to be Inadequate
By BRENT KENDALL and DION NISSENBAUM

... The office's review found that those conducting the check failed to verify his past work for the CIA through personnel records or interviews. Mr. Snowden said he couldn't provide names of people who could verify his employment because it was classified, according to the review.

The review said the background investigators didn't make enough efforts to interview character witnesses who could have provided details about Mr. Snowden. The former NSA contractor stated he only had social contact with his mother and girlfriend, who was listed as a character reference and was interviewed by investigators, according to the report.

Mr. Montoya said the background checkers were unsuccessful in contacting a second person whom Mr. Snowden had listed as a reference, and they didn't indicate whether they attempted to contact a third reference. The review also said those conducting the check fell short by failing to interview neighbors of Mr. Snowden during his residence in Japan ...

Also, the background interviewers learned from a work supervisor that Mr. Snowden had traveled to India, which Mr. Snowden hadn't reported during the background-check process, but the final background report failed to clarify the purpose of the trip, according to Mr. Montoya's review ...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324906304579039381125706104.html

[struggle4progress]

3. Snowden’s India visit before 2011 baffles US

Yashwant Raj, Hindustan Times
Washington, August 29, 2013
First Published: 01:06 IST(29/8/2013)
Last Updated: 02:41 IST(29/8/2013)

US investigators are baffled by a visit to India by NSA Leaker Edward Snowden that they stumbled upon during a review of his security clearance process ... Snowden did not report this visit ... And the background check that cleared him for accessing sensitive information that he subsequently leaked, didn’t explain it. Indian officials were also surprised by this development, which they will know more about after they pull out his visa application from their records ...

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/NorthAmerica/Snowden-s-India-visit-before-2011-baffles-US/Article1-1114375.aspx

[underthematrix]

4. here's how it works. If it is your work, you are responsible for the work

I find it difficult to believe snowden acted alone

[struggle4progress]

8. That's a nice theory, but in fact one major reason for the existence of corporations

is to provide a liability shield, so it may not actually be easy to hold anyone responsible

[KittyWampus]

5. LOL! Will read later but this just is so ludicrous.