Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

National Insider Threat Policy and Minimum Standards for Executive Branch Insider Threat Programs
The White House - Presisent Barack Obama ^ | 11/21/2012 | Office of the Press Secretary

Posted on 11/30/2012 8:04:50 AM PST by haffast

For Immediate Release - November 21, 2012

Presidential Memorandum -- National Insider Threat Policy and Minimum Standards for Executive Branch Insider Threat Programs

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT: National Insider Threat Policy and Minimum Standards for Executive Branch Insider Threat Programs

This Presidential Memorandum transmits the National Insider Threat Policy and Minimum Standards for Executive Branch Insider Threat Programs (Minimum Standards) to provide direction and guidance to promote the development of effective insider threat programs within departments and agencies to deter, detect, and mitigate actions by employees who may represent a threat to national security. These threats encompass potential espionage, violent acts against the Government or the Nation, and unauthorized disclosure of classified information, including the vast amounts of classified data available on interconnected United States Government computer networks and systems.

The Minimum Standards provide departments and agencies with the minimum elements necessary to establish effective insider threat programs. These elements include the capability to gather, integrate, and centrally analyze and respond to key threat-related information; monitor employee use of classified networks; provide the workforce with insider threat awareness training; and protect the civil liberties and privacy of all personnel.

The resulting insider threat capabilities will strengthen the protection of classified information across the executive branch and reinforce our defenses against both adversaries and insiders who misuse their access and endanger our national security.

BARACK OBAMA


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: benghazi; manning; patraeous; threat; threatpolicy

bin Laden? YES!

Benghazi? NOOOOOO!!!!!!!

1 posted on 11/30/2012 8:04:58 AM PST by haffast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: haffast

The ante just went up on whistleblowers. Huge.


2 posted on 11/30/2012 8:16:17 AM PST by MestaMachine (It's the !!!!TREASON!!!!, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: haffast

Not sure what all that means, but if it’s from Obama, it ain’t good!


3 posted on 11/30/2012 8:17:24 AM PST by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: haffast; annieokie; penelopesire; maggief; Protect the Bill of Rights; thouworm; SE Mom; Nachum; ...
Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Anyone wanting on or off this ping list, please advise.


Benghazi Index

4 posted on 11/30/2012 8:18:46 AM PST by MestaMachine (It's the !!!!TREASON!!!!, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: tomkat

Preaching to the choir.


6 posted on 11/30/2012 8:33:22 AM PST by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: haffast; MestaMachine

“These threats encompass potential espionage, violent acts against the Government or the Nation, and unauthorized disclosure of classified information, including the vast amounts of classified data available on interconnected United States Government computer networks and systems.”

Hmmmm, the last I heard, it is still illegal for someone with a security clearance to spy, advocate the violent overthrow of the government, or disclose classified information.

Think john walker, et. al. Those scumbags are in PRISON for what they did.

Where in this statement is anything different from years past?


7 posted on 11/30/2012 8:33:32 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012

See my post #7.

Wondering what’s different in this statement from 0 that is different from years past.


8 posted on 11/30/2012 8:35:18 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine; ilovesarah2012

Explanations range from mild....

White House Issues Insider Threat Policy
http://www.informationweek.com/government/security/white-house-issues-national-insider-thre/240142698

White House Advances Insider Threat Policy
November 26th, 2012 by Steven Aftergood
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2012/11/wh_insider_threat.html

....to wild:

AIPAC, decapitators inside US government: Intelligence analyst
http://robinwestenra.blogspot.com/2012/11/national-insider-threat-policy-and.html


9 posted on 11/30/2012 8:41:56 AM PST by haffast (Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. -Abe Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57

Pardon my French, but WHF is “ potential espionage”? Are they really going to imprison people for “potential” anything? Didn’t somebody make a movie about that, I think it was called Minority Report.


10 posted on 11/30/2012 8:57:05 AM PST by Excellence (9/11 was an act of faith.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57

As you rightly point out, these laws are already on the books and the worst leaks of classified information have mainly come from within the administration itself.
Were it not for whistleblowers, we would not know about Fast and Furious. ..among other corrupt deeds of this admin. Now we are looking straight at Benghazi and the deaths of four Americans with what seems to be government collusion.
So the question becomes:
From obama, WHY this and why NOW?


11 posted on 11/30/2012 9:00:58 AM PST by MestaMachine (It's the !!!!TREASON!!!!, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Excellence

To elaborate on the “potential” part of 0’s statement:

A person with a clearance is vulnerable when he engages in activity that opens him up to blackmail.

Examples that come to mind are excessive drinking, gambling, things that get him in debt or behavior that can be exploited by the agency that is trying to get access to the information that the clearance holder has.

People can get their clearances yanked for just the behavior, with no signs that some agent has tried to “turn” them.

No clearance, no job.

Depending on the activity, and the impact on national security, even without getting turned, its entirely possible to find a law being broken, and then charges brought.

The world of security clearances is VERY Orwellian, even before 0.


12 posted on 11/30/2012 9:17:20 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

Mesta,

If we make a distinction between things that were wrong to begin with and have been classified in order to hide them (example Benghazi, fast n furious), and things that are classified because disclosure would cause “grave damage” to national security (example stealth technology, navy seal techniques) then my assessment would hold true.


13 posted on 11/30/2012 9:25:37 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: haffast

That last link is by a guy named Gordon duff.

Wild is right.... I googled his name :0

Lotsa tinfoil hat stuff:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&site=&source=hp&q=Gordon+duff&oq=Gordon+duff&gs_l=mobile-gws-hp.3..0l5.2202.5567.0.6388.13.9.0.2.2.0.821.1194.3-1j6-1.2.0.les%3B..0.0...1ac.1.sYJueMnfw-M

But if they bury accurate info in with all the CR@p, then it makes it hard to sort out.....


14 posted on 11/30/2012 9:30:59 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57

“If we make a distinction between things that were wrong to begin with and have been classified in order to hide them (example Benghazi, fast n furious), and things that are classified because disclosure would cause “grave damage” to national security (example stealth technology, navy seal techniques) then my assessment would hold true.”

Yes, it would, but the addition of the single word, ‘potential’, changes the entire thing. To me, that says that anyone knowing, or suspected of having damaging information, about the administration would be scrutinized whether or not they had actually done anything to warrant such scrutiny. It is intimidation pure and simple,


15 posted on 11/30/2012 10:13:21 AM PST by MestaMachine (It's the !!!!TREASON!!!!, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
What the HELL was your problem with my #5 ? ?

Gestapo fear given you a twitchy delete finger ?

16 posted on 11/30/2012 10:23:37 AM PST by tomkat (liberty or death)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

See my post #12, even before 0 got in, the world of clearances was (and still is) quite Orwellian.

Throughout government and companies it was reiterated constantly that employees were obligated to report behaviors that COULD open them up to exploitation.

Behaviors on their own part, PLUS behaviors of their COWORKERS.

So in an odd sort of way, even before 0 came along blowing the whistle was encouraged.....

This one may encourage it further ....... law of unintended consequences and all that....


17 posted on 11/30/2012 10:39:14 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57; Admin Moderator
Since you asked, WH :

I labeled that pos obama a 'mulatto maggot', and posted this prescient graphic - http://i.imgur.com/cJDLl.jpg?1 - along with a link to gargle search results for 'The Road to Serfdom'

- - - - - -

If this site intends to roll over and pee in its panties, I’ll be ending my 13yrs of participation.

18 posted on 11/30/2012 10:48:58 AM PST by tomkat (liberty or death)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

. . . along with my monthly contribution, already small tho it may be as a direct result of this ecønømy.


19 posted on 11/30/2012 10:52:20 AM PST by tomkat (liberty or death)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: tomkat

My question was asked in a private reply.....


20 posted on 11/30/2012 11:09:19 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57
And nothing in my post above is indiscreet in the least in regard to anything said in private.
21 posted on 11/30/2012 11:16:24 AM PST by tomkat (liberty or death)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

Make older programs run in this version of Windows

Most programs written for Windows Vista also work in this version of Windows, but some older programs might run poorly or not at all. If a program written for an earlier version of Windows doesn’t run correctly, you can try changing the compatibility settings for the program, either manually or by using the Program Compatibility troubleshooter.

If changing the settings does not fix the problem, go to the program manufacturer’s website to see if there is an update for the program.

Warning
Do not use the Program Compatibility troubleshooter on older antivirus programs, disk utilities, or other system programs because it might cause data loss or create a security risk.

Run the Program Compatibility troubleshooter
Click to open the Program Compatibility troubleshooter.

Follow the instructions in the troubleshooter.

If you cannot install a program, insert the installation disc for the program and, using the troubleshooter, browse to the program’s setup file, usually called Setup.exe, Install.exe, or something similar. The troubleshooter is not designed to work on programs that have an .msi file name extension.

Tip
You can also open the Program Compatibility troubleshooter by right-clicking a program’s icon or shortcut and then clicking Troubleshoot compatibility.

To change compatibility settings manually
To change compatibility settings manually for a program, right-click the program icon, click Properties, and then click the Compatibility tab.

Setting
Description

Compatibility mode
Runs the program using settings from a previous version of Windows. Try this setting if you know the program is designed for (or worked in) a specific previous version of Windows.

Run in 256 colors
Uses a limited set of colors in the program. Some older programs are designed to use fewer colors.

Run in 640 × 480 screen resolution
Runs the program in a smaller-sized window. Try this setting if the graphical user interface appears jagged or is rendered improperly.

Disable visual themes
Disables themes on the program. Try this setting if you notice problems with the menus or buttons on the title bar of the program.

Disable desktop composition
Turns off transparency and other advanced display features. Choose this setting if window movement appears erratic or you notice other display problems.

Disable display scaling on high DPI settings
Turns off automatic resizing of programs if large-scale font size is in use. Try this setting if large-scale fonts are interfering with the appearance of the program. For more information, see Make the text on your screen larger or smaller.

Privilege level
Runs the program as an administrator. Some programs require administrator privileges to run properly. If you are not currently logged on as an administrator, this option is not available.

Change settings for all users
Lets you choose settings that will apply to all users on this computer.


I can only assume because he’s planning Chavez style dictatorship, and also expects a lot of gov employees to fight back and tell stuff they know.


22 posted on 11/30/2012 1:19:09 PM PST by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

MM - I HAVE NOT IDEA why all that jargon got posted in my comment to you!!! none! I’m freaked out and my computer is being “weird”....

I am completely mind boggled now.


23 posted on 11/30/2012 1:58:27 PM PST by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

AH, I think hub was trying to fix something on my computer. I’m going to go away now...


24 posted on 11/30/2012 2:01:22 PM PST by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

No worries, Mate. LOL


25 posted on 11/30/2012 2:20:50 PM PST by MestaMachine (It's the !!!!TREASON!!!!, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: haffast

Noticed release date of Nov. 21.


26 posted on 11/30/2012 8:07:02 PM PST by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All


Less Than $983 To Go!!
Please Help To Keep The
"Conservative News and Views"
On FR Coming By "Clicking Here"!!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


27 posted on 11/30/2012 8:08:20 PM PST by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

I really, really should preview every comment I make... lest foot in mouth disease that way.


28 posted on 11/30/2012 9:41:58 PM PST by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson