As someone who worked many years ago in a highly compartmented

[MineralMan]

Top Secret and beyond environment, I can say this:

Sloppy security is everywhere. Since humans are involved in all enterprises, lots and lots of mistakes get made. Despite briefings and signed documents about security practices, people do dumb stuff that violates security rules constantly. When they do, and it is discovered, what happens depends on many factors. Only extremely rarely, though, is anyone prosecuted for dumb-ass security lapses. Most often they are counseled on their sloppy behavior and told not to do that again. If there isn't intent to violate security regulations, they keep their clearances. Why? Because they are needed to keep doing all of the work that is required.

It doesn't matter where people work, either. I worked for a time in the NSA building as a USAF E-4, handling and processing extremely sensitive materials. I saw many security breaches during that time. Daily. Some were minor, but not all were minor. What I never saw was someone not showing up for work after one of those involuntary breaches occurred. There were debriefings and counseling sessions to ensure the breach was not repeated. But punishments of any kind were very, very rare.

That's the reality. And people outside of such agencies are commonly even more lax with security measures. Frankly, unless someone is caught deliberately transferring classified information with malicious intent, the consequences are not permanent nor career-ending. That was what I observed.

I can't provide any details, because that would breach my own security agreements. So, I won't. But, even in the highest levels of secure environments, lots of mistakes and inadvertent breaches occur, due to carelessness or misunderstandings. And those happen with people who are specifically trained in proper procedures.

In other environments, precautions are even less rigidly followed.

The email thing is over. No charges will be brought. That's not even surprising. What is surprising is all the foofaraw being raised about it. It's over.

[madamesilverspurs]

1. “The text books were kept in a locked vault..."

“The text books were kept in a locked vault, and were under the eye of armed guards until they were returned to the vault at the end of class.” So reported one of my brothers, retired military who served as an instructor in some classified processes. He also said that the restroom down the hall from the classrooms had a magazine rack, and that Scientific American usually had the same information that was locked in the vault. Go figure.

[MineralMan]

10. That's funny, isn't it.

It's also one of the problems in government with security and classified information. You might be handling documents marked "Top Secret" and read the same stuff in a newspaper that evening. The overweening attention to security often leads to over-classification and contempt for the very rules you're supposed to follow.

High security environments are like self-contained bubble worlds that don't even recognize what is secret and what is public knowledge. I'm sure the State Department faces that all the time. Things you aren't supposed to talk about are on the evening news in detail. It is not useful most of the time.

[DCBob]

2. Very true. The other part of this I can relate to, is the hassle that security places on people..

just trying to get their day to day work done. Much of the security policy is absolutely necessary but some of it is overkill and I can see trying to work around it if possible.. as Hillary seems to have done with her personal email server. I would probably have done the same thing in her situation.

[MineralMan]

11. There is that, too, and it leads to contempt for the security systems,

most of which were put in place by people who don't even know what you're dealing with. There's lots of overstatement about how sensitive some information actually is. Kind of a right hand/left hand conflict.

[politicaljunkie41910]

3. In this case, there seems to be something unique about the State Dept because it came up over and

over again, that the State Dept has THE 'most technically challenged system' for handling secured information of any federal agency. I never understood why is this the case, but I've heard it repeatedly. Having worked with the system myself, I can confirm that the ability to send and receive information along approved channels can be frustrating to the Nth degree. Also, mistakes are made when you have different means of handling different documents. People are human. People have work to complete on a daily basis and systems are up and then down, or located in other areas where you have to travel to use the secure facilities only to find that your transmission didn't go through or something else upon returning back to your regular work location. Most people don't set out to screw up things. The screw ups are often the result of systems which are patch works of other systems, instead of an integrated system which works efficiently most of the time.

[charlyvi]

26. Can't remember where I read this,

But what I read said that when Congress is controlled by Republicans, State gets short shrift when it comes to budgeting. The reason being that their True Believers hold diplomacy in great contempt. They fund Defense up the wazoo, but State not so much.

[LiberalFighter]

29. That part about different means of handling different documents.

It is difficult enough to remember that when I send email to someone which account I need to use that I access from my main computer. They have to use an entirely different computer and protocol than their normal system. Not very efficient and possibly can be stressful when deadlines might be looming.

[Igel]

4. Many places support and try to keep employees.

A lot of people are zero-tolerance. They say they like tolerance and management support but in practice demand absolute compliance.

Ideology barely matters. What matters is obedience to the cause. More than the people involved.

[BumRushDaShow]

5. "foofaraw"

Great word and I didn't even realize the term existed until I looked it up!

[MineralMan]

8. It's a very useful word when dealing with Republicans

and various other groups of folks.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

27. It's basically a minor kerfuffle.

[DemonGoddess]

6. K&R!

Thank you! I do appreciate your input, based on your experiences.

[Nay]

7. I wasn't in a top secret environment, but only a highly secure environment, but I saw

all of what you describe. No amount of training, etc., would keep breaches from happening weekly. If we had fired everyone who fucked up, there'd be nobody there.

One thing you haven't described is the desire of the management to have amenities (like certain building designs(physical and ideological ease for the mgmt), or 'holes' that any contractor could drive a truck through (so stuff would be cheaper)) that ruled out easy methods that could have provided actual security. I have stories -- but, like you, I can't tell them.

[nolabear]

9. Amen Brother! People so want some kind of perfect beings to be in high positions.

And when humans end up being simply human they think they've been betrayed.

[MineralMan]

12. Well, it tends to depend on whether they like the person or not.

So it has seemed to me with this whole pile of nonsense.

[BobbyDrake]

13. I worked as an evening teller at a bank for a while.

In the security arrangement this bank employed, management was to have 1/2 of the combination to the main safe, and a non-management employee was to have the other half. One each of management and non-management was required to access the safe, which was necessary on a daily basis in order to balance the safe with the bank's statement.

As a non-management employee, I had the second half of the combination. But I noticed that when asked to provide their first half of the combination, one of the managers always reached under their desk blotter, which is where they stored the card with the first half of the combination written on it. And that's where they left the card, every damned day.

Security based on humans is subject to human error.

But what bothers me is all of the people who make mistakes in their own lives acting like some public official that they've fixated upon is supposed to defy all logic and reason and have lived a mistake-free existence.

[MineralMan]

14. One of my favorite stories from my work life

happened when I worked at a garage that maintained county vehicles, including Sheriff's department vehicles. That led to me having many conversations with Sheriff's Deputies who brought their vehicles in for servicing.

The Sheriff's Department had busted a shipment of high-grade marijuana at one point, in collaboration with the DEA and other agencies. There were over 6000 lb. of Thai Stick dope seized. It was stored as evidence in the department's "secure" evidence room, pending charges and a trial of the smugglers.

This high value stash was the talk of the department for some time, but delays and other things led to a long period before a trial would take place, and the talk dropped off. Well, when it came time for the trial, it was discovered that that the wonderful dope had somehow vanished from that "secure" evidence storage. Lacking the evidence, the case had to be dropped and the smugglers walked.

Coincidentally, a couple of undercover narcotics officers with the department had resigned about a month before the discovery and had moved out of the area. Sometimes security isn't what it seems, I guess. Last I heard, they were living somewhere in Central America, according to my sources in the department. It was a huge joke to the deputies who came through the shop.

Oops!

[sarae]

36. That's what bothers me, too...

all of the "outrage" among people that you know very well make just as many, if not more, mistakes in their daily lives. Worse, a lot of their "mistakes" are intentional to begin with. But of course, they're only investigating Clinton...because they're always investigating Clinton 24/7 for everything she does.

The hypocrisy is breath-taking.

[eppur_se_muova]

15. I was told that a significant number of Secret documents are simply lost ...

... in desk clutter.

This from a contractor with years of experience with NASA, Air Force and Army.

[MineralMan]

16. Most of them end up in a burn bag and get incinerated.

Tons and tons of paper has gone up in smoke. But, yes, some gets lost in clutter or filed away, never to be seen again. Most of that paper never needed to be produced, really. These days, a lot of stuff is just data, though, with paper less used.

Still, there are terabytes upon terabytes of useless information out there that have no real reason for existing. There's an amazing amount of waste in the intelligence community. More than anyone would believe, and it's all classified.

[LiberalFighter]

32. I imagined it is classified so that others don't see the stupidity

within the intelligence community.

[HumanityExperiment]

17. ...leadership and judgement...

the question concerns using private servers, why add that layer with email?

FOIA request come to mind as one aspect

then layer this deposition statement

"Hillary Clinton’s top aide said during a deposition that the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee destroyed her schedules as the head of the State Department, according to a new report. Huma Abedin revealed the information last week during a deposition over Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of State"

The historic levels of unfavorables on both candidates leads to the narrow gap on polls between the two candidates

It appears folks here either willfully disregard the facts concerning the historic unfavorables and spin / deflect these facts to craft a better narrative to insulate HRC but the facts remain and the polls bear this out

If folks here believe this is over they are mistaken, the narrative is being played but the historic unfavorables remain unchanged

This isn't about 'charges' this about perception, leadership and judgement...

the perception needs to be addressed, why folks disregard this is stunning

[MineralMan]

18. You just keep thinking that...

See you on November 9.

[HumanityExperiment]

19. this isn't about 'my thinking that'... this is about perception being validated by polls

Brexit is an easy example to point to in that regard...

It is simply stunning to see post after post that tries to craft these insulating narratives concerning a candidate

We should all be working with the facts rather than spin and deflection, this is a much better way to support a candidate

[Lil Missy]

20. The perception is that this was ANOTHER partisan witchhunt against one of the Clintons.

[HumanityExperiment]

22. no it wasn't...

my points still stand, this is just another in the numerous spin/deflection replies

I'd rather converse about the facts, putting effort in REDUCING the historic unfavorables as it pertains to HRC

Why folks here spend this amount of effort NOT doing that here on DU boggles the mind

[Lil Missy]

24. That IS my perception and that of many others on DU and in Real Life.

If you want to advocate against our nominee, maybe you don't belong here.

[HumanityExperiment]

25. funny... you're doing more harm in regards to HRC than anyone else...

I'm not advocating against, I'm advocating for the facts

continue your feeble insulation of HRC against the facts and those historic unfavorables will only get larger

Why would you want to further harm the candidate is stunning to see in action

[Lil Missy]

30. your concern is duly noted. n/t

[LiberalFighter]

33. You are being so nice. :)

[HumanityExperiment]

34. yet the dismissive deflection and feeble insulation replies continue...

n/t

[MoonRiver]

21. Thank you Mineral Man. This is an important read.

Paperwork mistakes, and email problems are rampant. No matter how careful people are these issues will happen.

[oasis]

23. Exactamundo. Time for us to move on.

[hobbit709]

28. If I had been that sloppy in handling classified material in my day

I would have been nailed with at least an Article 134 before I could blink.

[Maeve]

31. Thanks, MineralMan

Close relatives in the armed service are livid, saying if THEY did this, they'd be charged...it's not the same, but I can't tell them that or I'd risk a fire-storm I don't need. Never mind they don't like Hilary to begin with and were looking for someone to validate their feelings...
Hubby does computer work and even seemingly knowledgeable people don't understand about security and e-mails (but hey, that is part of what keeps Hubby employed!)

[Surya Gayatri]

35. Massive K & R. Thanks for posting. So spot on.