Some might find this interesting:
Over the holidays, I spoke to an individual I know well and was told that US intelligence agencies keep a local copy of Wikipedia available for employees who are isolated from the Internet for security reasons. Apparently, its updated once a year. (Its separate from Intellipedia, which is used for sharing information classified up to TS).
Additionally, it turns out that if intelligence employees have their names published on a site like Wikipedia (even without a connection to their position) they are dismissed or transferred to a public position (i.e . public relations).
The quote was "Hello, we found your name on Wikipedia. You're the new CIA job fair representative."
(posted using alternate e-mail)
On Dec 27, 2007 12:45 AM, Nachman nachman.chayal@gmail.com wrote:
Additionally, it turns out that if intelligence employees have their names published on a site like Wikipedia (even without a connection to their position) they are dismissed or transferred to a public position (i.e . public relations).
Nice way of getting rid of a superior who is occupying a job you envy.
Mathias
On 12/27/07, Nachman nachman.chayal@gmail.com wrote:
Over the holidays, I spoke to an individual I know well and was told that US intelligence agencies keep a local copy of Wikipedia available for employees who are isolated from the Internet for security reasons. Apparently, its updated once a year. (Its separate from Intellipedia, which is used for sharing information classified up to TS).
Once a year? Um. I struggle to fathom that.
Steve
Obviously they don't want to know about anything till its history, and are a firm believer in a rigid application of NOT NEWS.
sounds totally consistent with everything we know about them.
On 12/29/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/27/07, Nachman nachman.chayal@gmail.com wrote:
Over the holidays, I spoke to an individual I know well and was told that US intelligence agencies keep a local copy of Wikipedia available for employees who are isolated from the Internet for security reasons. Apparently, its updated once a year. (Its separate from Intellipedia, which is used for sharing information classified up to TS).
Once a year? Um. I struggle to fathom that.
Steve
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Dec 29, 2007 4:50 PM, David Goodman dgoodmanny@gmail.com wrote:
Obviously they don't want to know about anything till its history, and are a firm believer in a rigid application of NOT NEWS.
sounds totally consistent with everything we know about them.
Maybe Wikipedia should also devise a policy of only allowing updates once a year!
On 26/12/2007, Nachman nachman.chayal@gmail.com wrote:
Some might find this interesting:
Over the holidays, I spoke to an individual I know well and was told that US intelligence agencies keep a local copy of Wikipedia available for employees who are isolated from the Internet for security reasons. Apparently, its updated once a year. (Its separate from Intellipedia, which is used for sharing information classified up to TS).
Additionally, it turns out that if intelligence employees have their names published on a site like Wikipedia (even without a connection to their position) they are dismissed or transferred to a public position (i.e . public relations).
The quote was "Hello, we found your name on Wikipedia. You're the new CIA job fair representative."
That would be an extremely stupid policy... so it's probably true.
On 26/12/2007, Nachman nachman.chayal@gmail.com wrote:
Some might find this interesting:
Over the holidays, I spoke to an individual I know well and was told that US intelligence agencies keep a local copy of Wikipedia available for employees who are isolated from the Internet for security reasons. Apparently, its updated once a year.
We know that isn't true. Mostly because CIA reports have cited stuff that has been in wikipedia for less than a year (children of someone of interest outside the US not a significant detail.)
So if the once a year update came sometime after the insert of the info in Wikipedia?
On Jan 1, 2008 2:42 PM, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 26/12/2007, Nachman nachman.chayal@gmail.com wrote:
Some might find this interesting:
Over the holidays, I spoke to an individual I know well and was told that US intelligence agencies keep a local copy of Wikipedia available for employees who are isolated from the Internet for security reasons. Apparently, its updated once a year.
We know that isn't true. Mostly because CIA reports have cited stuff that has been in wikipedia for less than a year (children of someone of interest outside the US not a significant detail.) -- geni
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
geni - just because the CIA cite things less than a year old doesn't prove that they update more regularly. Only if a sequence of events as follows occours will we know that they update more regularly:
Event A happens. CIA cite Event A in short period of time eg. a week or two. Event B happens shortly afterwards. CIA cite Event B again, shortly afterwards.
This will prove that EITHER they are using the live copy of Wikipedia OR they update more regularly. Assuming they update at regular intervals , this also determines the approximate frequency with which they update (eg Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, etc.)
Regards, Stwalkerster.
On 01/01/2008, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
So if the once a year update came sometime after the insert of the info in Wikipedia?
On Jan 1, 2008 2:42 PM, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 26/12/2007, Nachman nachman.chayal@gmail.com wrote:
Some might find this interesting:
Over the holidays, I spoke to an individual I know well and was told
that US
intelligence agencies keep a local copy of Wikipedia available for
employees
who are isolated from the Internet for security reasons. Apparently,
its
updated once a year.
We know that isn't true. Mostly because CIA reports have cited stuff that has been in wikipedia for less than a year (children of someone of interest outside the US not a significant detail.) -- geni
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
The first e-mail said it was a static annually renewed version for security isolated personnel, not all personnel. I'm sure there is at least one person employed by the CIA that has 'net access. Maybe even two. Anyway, don't think I'm going to comment in this thread anymore :-P
Nathan
On Jan 2, 2008 11:19 AM, Simon Walker stwalkerster@googlemail.com wrote:
This will prove that EITHER they are using the live copy of Wikipedia OR they update more regularly. Assuming they update at regular intervals , this also determines the approximate frequency with which they update (eg Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, etc.)
Or, possibly the CIA have other methods (than Wikipedia) of sourcing information?
Just trowing it out there.
--aliasd
On 02/01/2008, aliasd wiki4@da-bom.com wrote:
On Jan 2, 2008 11:19 AM, Simon Walker stwalkerster@googlemail.com wrote:
This will prove that EITHER they are using the live copy of Wikipedia OR they update more regularly. Assuming they update at regular intervals , this also determines the approximate frequency with which they update (eg Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, etc.)
Or, possibly the CIA have other methods (than Wikipedia) of sourcing information?
Just trowing it out there.
Sometimes they explicitly cite Wikipedia. I think Nathan has the answer - the CIA do allow their employees full net access, just not from the computers that have sensitive information on them.