[WikiEN-l] Intellipedia

[George Herbert]

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Jon <scream at nonvocalscream.com> wrote:
> 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


I'm basing this on the talk given at LISA - their description was that
they did interact, and that there was plenty of linking from above
down into lower levels.

That could be our equivalent of "cross-wiki" - but they did indicate
they'd gone to great lengths to add additional security clearance
verification features for info and for user access, and implied it was
in the same wiki instance.  I didn't get a chance to ask that
directly, though I did get a chance to ask him in passing if he'd
contact Brion and see if any of their code could be released back to
the community (which I gather hasn't happened, so I guess not).


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com