Posted on 12/09/2009 10:10:16 AM PST by SilvieWaldorfMD
The Department of Homeland Security has initiated unspecified personnel actions against individuals involved in the bungled online posting this spring of a government document that revealed airport screening secrets, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told senators Wednesday morning.
A contract employee was responsible for failing to properly redact a 93-page Transportation Security Administration operating manual onto a government procurement Web site, allowing computer users to recover blacked-out information by copying and pasting them into other documents, Napolitano said. TSA supervisors were also involved, Napolitano said.
"The security of the traveling public has never been put at risk," Napolitano assured the Senate Judiciary Committee at an oversight hearing, repeating earlier TSA statements that the document was out of date, never implemented and had been subjected to six revisions after the breach.
Napolitano said DHS Inspector General Richard Skinner is conducting an independent review of the incident, in addition to TSA's Office of Inspections.
"We have already initiated personnel action against the individuals involved in this," Napolitano told panel Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), without elaborating. "We have already instituted an internal review to determine what else needs to be done to make sure this incident never recurs."
The TSA confirmed Tuesday that the document was posted online as part of a contract solicitation. The manual details procedures for screening passengers and checked baggage, such as technical settings used by X-ray machines and explosives detectors. It also includes pictures of credentials used by members of Congress, CIA employees and federal air marshals, and it identifies 12 countries whose passport holders are automatically subjected to added scrutiny.
TSA officials said that the manual was posted online in a redacted form on a federal procurement Web site, but that the digital redactions were inadequate.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Boy do I feel better now!
Big Ruh Roh. I translate this as meaning: the traveling public has been put at mortal risk.
Allow me for a moment to don my tinfoil hat. Also, tell me if someone has brought up this idea:
what if the leak wasn’t an accident ? moreover, what if this ushers in a new security requirement, such as RFID ?
The nature of the leak (almost) renders the security protocols useless. Even the citizens will call out for new techniques, regardless of the validity of those in place.
Am i paranoid ?
I don’t know if you’re paranoid, but reading your post made me paranoid. For the bureaucratic mind, your “suggestion” simply follows.
What no Skittles this year?
www.cryptome.org -— tsa-screening.zip -> tsa-screening.pdf
Why when you read “independent review” do you think “politicized white-wash”?
TSA Screening Manual (zip file) from Cryptome website
From WikiLeaks (PDF file on web page)
Okay, if nobody is being put at risk by the release of the un-redacted document, then why did you attempt to redact in the first place? Why wasn't the whole document made public?
“and it identifies 12 countries whose passport holders are automatically subjected to added scrutiny. “
curious to know which countries these are, and if saudi arabia is on the list.
Such obvious logic is forbidden in this country. You could get in real trouble for that.
The health component sets aside $19 billion to encourage hospitals and physicians' offices to speed up their use of electronic health records. Physicians' offices can get about $44000 if they computerize their medical records...
A nationwide health information data exchange will contain extremely private and personal health information. The public has no reason to fear such a data repository if proper measures are taken.
Bingo. (And yes, my family says I’m paranoid.)
Especially when the national debt is discussed. Just keep printing the money. Or, better yet, let's continue to borrow dollars from the Chinese at 3% interest, then lend it to the big banks at 0%, so the banks can lend it back to us for 3% so they can recover from their bad housing investments. Don't worry, all the interest will eventually be paid by our grandchildren. How's that for logic?
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.