[WikiEN-l] Intellipedia

[Jon]

George Herbert wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Jon <scream at nonvocalscream.com> wrote:
>   
>> Fred Bauder wrote:
>>     
>>> Why Wikipedia and Intellipedia (CIA's version of Wikipedia) can add Value
>>> for Information Users
>>>
>>> http://www.birdsonginfo.com/blog/2009/05/in-addition-to-analysis-we-need-people-who-can-create-an--ecosystem-of-knowledge-that-is-not-specifically-about-answering.html
>>>
>>> Fred Bauder
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>>       
>> Clarification...
>>
>> The Intellipedia does not belong to the CIA, but all IC community users,
>> that use it.  It is actually managed by the ODNI.  Additionally, two of
>> the three wiki s are classified.  The third is SBU, which is not a
>> classification.  Users must still be cleared for such use however.  Note
>> that access to classified material is not permitted remotely on the
>> other two Wiki's.
>>
>> (according to publicly available sources.)
>>
>> Best,
>> Jon
>>     
>
> From the presentation at last years LISA conference, the three wikis
> are integrated, with a classification level access control along the
> lines of WP access controls but much more robust, as the security
> classifications business is fairly rigidly controlled...
>
> You can look down from a higher classification level and have links to
> and across lower classification level info.
>
>
> Funny snippet - one of their major internal organizational issues is
> that a lot of stuff in Wikipedia on some subjects is still formally
> highly classified, even if well known in public.  They had cases where
> people reported "You can't say that!  Classify it to Top Secret
> immediately!", and the response was "We imported that article straight
> from Wikipedia, that's what the public sees out there already...".
> Which was in some cases not good enough, and they had to remove things
> and link out to us (though they indicated they were now generally
> winning those fights).
>
>
>   
I don't believe they are integrated.  The publically available 
descriptions of the three networks state they do not co-mingle.  They 
might link to one another, but I think integration might be pushing it.  
I'll research any available press releases and what not from the DoD, 
but I do I've derailed the conversation topic from it's original intent, 
and for that, I apologize. :)

Jon