Education+Sponsorship+payment may lead to a Security Clearance

[streaker69]

Re: Educattion+Sponsorship+payment may lead to a Security Clearance

A friend used me as a reference when he was applying to the Secret Service. When they called, the only asked a few questions, mostly verifying that I knew him, where I knew him from and if I had any certain concerns regarding him in general. Nothing real specific.

[shrdlu]

Re: Educattion+Sponsorship+payment may lead to a Security Clearance

...I know on the application you have to list each place you have lived in the last X years and a contact from each place you lived, but what if you did not know anyone well enough to have contact information for them? I do not tend to make close friends, and while I am not a hermit, I am quiet and not very outgoing. I generally only know people by their first names or just casually talk to them without knowing their names. Would a lack of contacts have any negative effect as long as everything else checks out ok? I know my financial status is good, I have no illicit connections, no close friends or relatives with foreign citizenship, no criminal record, no substance abuse, no "questionable" sexual or social behavior, etc.

It depends. Seriously. You don't say which agency or type of clearance (and you should not say this in a public forum). For a simple Secret clearance that is DOD, the expectation is that you can provide a nice clean unbroken line of people who know you, and knew your whereabouts, during the time in question. I've seen paperwork that covered as little as seven years, or as many as twenty five. Often it says number of years, or from age eighteen until now, when the required number of years extends back before age eighteen.

It's better to have a few references that have known you for an extended length of time than to have references for each place you've lived. One thing that investigators are reasonably understanding on is that computer science and electrical engineering people (among others) just tend not to have a large circle of references from which to draw.

The MOST important thing on your paperwork is honesty. If anyone has had access to the real computer databases, like lexis-nexis, you will be immediately aware of how little you can hide from someone who is honestly trying to check your background. Considering your relative youth, and background, I doubt strongly that you would have any real obstacles. Having things like utilities in your name (yours, not your spouse) is very helpful in showing continuity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LexisNexis

If you are actually undergoing this process (as in, paperwork has been signed, and submitted), then you should mention to your neighbors that an investigator might be coming around, and that it's fine with you if they talk with them. This step is more important than you might realize, since you may have a neighbor with a quirky sense of humor, or someone who thinks that the investigator is there for them, and not you.

[AgentDarkApple]

Re: Educattion+Sponsorship+payment may lead to a Security Clearance

I read through a lot of the 2009 cases, and some of them are actually pretty hilarious. Especially the one about the guy who waved the gun at someone in traffic and still got his clearance approved

I do have a question for those who are knowledgeable about this... I know on the application you have to list each place you have lived in the last X years and a contact from each place you lived, but what if you did not know anyone well enough to have contact information for them? I do not tend to make close friends, and while I am not a hermit, I am quiet and not very outgoing. I generally only know people by their first names or just casually talk to them without knowing their names. Would a lack of contacts have any negative effect as long as everything else checks out ok? I know my financial status is good, I have no illicit connections, no close friends or relatives with foreign citizenship, no criminal record, no substance abuse, no "questionable" sexual or social behavior, etc.

[theprez98]

Re: Educattion+Sponsorship+payment may lead to a Security Clearance

I've commented in the past that the Industrial Security Clearance Decisions page reads like the guest list for the Jerry Springer Show.

I'll nudge a retired AFOSI that might be willing to talk about investigating clearances.

That's actually a really good page not only for understanding why clearances are denied, but why they are granted in certain cases where the individual has mitigated the issue at question.

[erehwon]

Re: Educattion+Sponsorship+payment may lead to a Security Clearance

I've commented in the past that the Industrial Security Clearance Decisions page reads like the guest list for the Jerry Springer Show.

I'll nudge a retired AFOSI that might be willing to talk about investigating clearances.

[shrdlu]

Re: Getting started in the security field

I figured as much that investigators would probably not want to speak. But it at least worth looking into.

And on the paperwork side I meant the filing side...and yes, the bane of my existence for 3 years.

I meant that adjuticators would not talk. The investigation side is pretty simple. Adjutication is complicated.

I've come to realize that my dislike of being on stage is less important than contributing. If you're still interested, figuring out a decent email address for me is pretty easy (or just ask Cot). I really don't like PM stuff, just as an FYI.

[theprez98]

Re: Getting started in the security field

I believe that even someone who is retired is not going to speak to you (or anyone) on that process. I actually even thought over whether to comment on it. One of the reasons (which is obvious the moment I state it) is the potential for lawsuits where someone's been denied (or approved, and then later shows that they should not have been).

Also, when you state that you've been on the paperwork side, do you mean on the approving outgoing paperwork, or are you just referring to the bane of everyone's existence, filling out all those forms.

I figured as much that investigators would probably not want to speak. But it at least worth looking into.

And on the paperwork side I meant the filing side...and yes, the bane of my existence for 3 years.

[shrdlu]

Re: Getting started in the security field

I'm talking with another member of the forums here to put this together. I've been on the paperwork side of clearances, but I think having someone who has done investigations would definitely be a "must". Someone who has done adjudications would be even better, although I don't know that we could find someone like that.

I believe that even someone who is retired is not going to speak to you (or anyone) on that process. I actually even thought over whether to comment on it. One of the reasons (which is obvious the moment I state it) is the potential for lawsuits where someone's been denied (or approved, and then later shows that they should not have been).

Also, when you state that you've been on the paperwork side, do you mean on the approving outgoing paperwork, or are you just referring to the bane of everyone's existence, filling out all those forms.

[theprez98]

Re: Getting started in the security field

Oh, I'll show up, and participate from the audience. I just don't like being up on stage, at all. Maybe I'll see if I can persuade a friend or so that does background investigations to show up. Now THAT would be fun, and certainly eye-opening.

Every once in a while, when it's winter, and too cold to play outside, I think about going off and becoming an investigator (it's what a lot of folk like me that retire do, and most of them do it because it's interesting, not because they need to work).

I'm talking with another member of the forums here to put this together. I've been on the paperwork side of clearances, but I think having someone who has done investigations would definitely be a "must". Someone who has done adjudications would be even better, although I don't know that we could find someone like that.

[shrdlu]

Re: Getting started in the security field

It looks like points and counter points have been made, and it looks like the issue has been clarified. An apology has been made, and a mistake acknowledged. Let's move on and make the topic more productive

You know that I'm fond of you, and I find the subject interesting, but that was NOT an apology.

There is no contradiction. My original post was overly simplified as a result of underestimating the comprehension of the reader. For this I appologize.

Yes I see the word "appologize" (boy needs a spell checker). One suggests that "...underestimating the comprehension of the reader..." is more insulting than many of the other things that were posted.

we do really need to have the "security clearance" panel discussion at DEFCON (yes, I know, you don't want to participate...)

Oh, I'll show up, and participate from the audience. I just don't like being up on stage, at all. Maybe I'll see if I can persuade a friend or so that does background investigations to show up. Now THAT would be fun, and certainly eye-opening.

Every once in a while, when it's winter, and too cold to play outside, I think about going off and becoming an investigator (it's what a lot of folk like me that retire do, and most of them do it because it's interesting, not because they need to work).

[KernelConflag]

Re: Getting started in the security field

One idea that has been proposed in the past in defeating background checks, TSA checks, security check-point checks, random search, etc. is to brute-force the attack. If there is only 1 target, but 50 "suicide bombers" heading for that target, only one has to get through. Diversification in the techniques used to not be spotted would also provide feedback to the attacker, and help them understand which attacks work to defeat the system of checks, and
which attacks are detectable.

How to defeat this system of checks? My idea would take quite some time to implement. If a single school participating in this program were to experience a surge in applicants. The quality of the check process would most likely decrease. The school would fill its quota of applicants very quickly. Whoever needs to get in has to be an early applicant before the flood strikes. All of the excessive applicants could likely end up in the trash without review. The school will max out the number of participants, probably prematurely. Some applicants that should have been selected would not be selected because of the flood of applications, as well as those who shouldn't get in, could get in.

Overload a single point of entry, the quality of the check process should decrease, the possibility for esuccess should increase.

[bjaming]

Re: Educattion+Sponsorship+payment may lead to a Security Clearance

I'd like to hear a security clearance talk at defcon. I don't really know if I'll ever need one, or that I would want to work on any number of DoD projects around here because I've heard about how they usually go.

That's about all I have to add to the thread.

[theprez98]

Re: Getting started in the security field

I for one would like to hear that talk.

xor

Keep your fingers crossed and hopefully we can get something together.

[KernelConflag]

Re: Getting started in the security field

What kind of problems could this create? If a large enough group of people flock to register with programs like this, and get sponsorship, and complete this process, is it possible to overwhelm the background check process and decrease the quality of review? Will a maximum number of people allowed for sponsorship provide a flow-control mechanism to prevent such an attack?

In my opinion, 2 things need to happen to prevent these programs from being floaded with applicants. First is obscurity. Obscurity should serve as a method (but not the only method) to ensure quality applicants. The program shouldn't be widely available for participation such as commercial or 3rd party certifications. The SFS program is of course no secret, but probably obscure enough. Second, I feel the need for a control-mechanism you mentioned should be the burden of the schools participating in these programs. This could be accomplished by limiting the funding available for the program, thereby forcing the school to select top-notch applicants. Much in the same manner as scholarships for various other programs are awarded. The cost of the background check also serves as a temporary deterant. It's difficult for me to speculate the outcome of a diverse attack on this issue. There a qualification 'rules', but of course rules are meant to be broken. Being that a govt agency would be applying the rules, I would guestimate that about 80% of applicants are held to the 'rules', leaving 20% to the unknown.

[xor]

Re: Getting started in the security field

we do really need to have the "security clearance" panel discussion at DEFCON (yes, I know, you don't want to participate...)

I for one would like to hear that talk.

xor