Want a security clearance? Feds will now check your Facebook and Twitter first

Federal investigators looking at applicants’ backgrounds to determine their trustworthiness will not ask for passwords or log in to private accounts, limiting their searches to public postings. And when they find information that has no relevance to whether they should have access to classified information, it will be wiped from government servers, the policy promises.

Want a security clearance? Feds will now check your Facebook and Twitter first

If you are reading this and you are surprised that it is not in the HOAX forum, then you and I have that common. But alas, here we are.

The government will start scanning Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other social media accounts of thousands of federal employees and contractors applying and re-applying for security clearances in a first-ever policy released Friday.

Federal investigators looking at applicants’ backgrounds to determine their trustworthiness will not ask for passwords or log in to private accounts, limiting their searches to public postings. And when they find information that has no relevance to whether they should have access to classified information, it will be wiped from government servers, the policy promises.

I like how they made use of certain words here. One of these words is 'wiped' as this is almost certainly a political pun referring to Hillary. The other one is 'promises' as in the government promises not to [insert orwellian idiom].

“Agencies make security clearance decisions using a ‘whole person approach’ to assessing who is an acceptable security risk,” Beth Cobert, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management, told lawmakers Friday at a hearing on the new policy. “One component of that approach in the 21st century is social media.”

Investigators will examine only information that is readily available through online searches. Applicants for clearances will not be required to disclose Facebook “friends” whose names are otherwise hidden, or reveal all of their Twitter handles.

And then there they go again with these words! Like 'acceptable' security risk, and only info that is 'readily available' through online searches.

Anyways, continuing...

OPM, which does one million background investigations every year for federal agencies, is starting a pilot program to test how social media will figure into the the security clearances required for tens of thousands of federal jobs and contracts.

Congress also is considering a bill to require similar new scrutiny during background checks of intelligence agency employees.

Officials told two panels of the House Oversight Committee that they have been considering social media searches for years, but struggled to balance the privacy rights of applicants with national security needs. And there are still many questions about how the new policy will work.

“We haven’t identified the full value of social media,” Evanina said. “Is the effort and resource allocation worthy of collecting it? Where do we allocate [these searches] during the investigative process? It will be resource-intensive.”

There's something sneaky suspicious about this news and I can't quite put my finger on it. I feel as though their choice to integrate social media into their screening for security clearance is politically motivated, but I do not know why. Perhaps one of you can fill the blanks.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

Well those are both public media sites.

Federal investigators looking at applicants’ backgrounds to determine their trustworthiness will not ask for passwords or log in to private accounts, limiting their searches to public postings

I don't really see that as a bad thing. Most workplaces nowadays check those regularly. They aren't asking for your account information, just looking at what you put out there on your own.

a reply to: Vector99

Meh. It still stinks somehow... I just know it.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

Well the NSA has been "investigating" every single person in the world they possibly can for a while now. Personally, I don't believe in secrets, because secrets are things that are inherently bad, otherwise they wouldn't be secrets.

But the world today does, and they think it's necessary for "safety and security".

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
Want a security clearance? Feds will now check your Facebook and Twitter first

'Cold' indeed! *__-
This was obvious from the earliest 'myspace' days!

The basic rule seems to work for me, never do or say or think anything that you wouldn't want the Universe Knowing, because, we do!
There are no secrets.
ALL is Known!

a reply to: ColdWisdom

Did they mention what the procedure was for those of us who have neither, and never have? I hope not having a public life invader does not disqualify me.

a reply to: Vector99

Yea the NSA can say they've been investigating every single person in the world all they want. But what good is it when we have things like the Boston Marathon Bombings & the San Bernardino shootings, two things that were completely preventable given the metadata tracked by the perpetrators prior to the tragedies?

a reply to: AmericanRealist

I'm in the same boat as you and your guess is as good as mine.

And there goes my VISA, i always wanted to visit Yellowstone, guess it will always be a dream

a reply to: ColdWisdom

Want a security clearance? Feds will now check your Facebook and Twitter first

Well of course they do - it would be irresponsible not to. What would the point being of assessing applicants if they did not even check into what the applicants have publically stated?

a reply to: DupontDeux

Yea ok then clearly they should have been doing this all along and if they WEREN'T then someone has some serious explaining to do. And if they WEREN'T and now suddenly decided that they WERE, why make it a headline?

a reply to: ColdWisdom

And what, if you don´t use "social" media crap?
Terrorist?
Will people be forced to use "social" media in the future, otherwise... "FEMA-Camp"?

a reply to: ColdWisdom

It's possible to check/read private messages and posts on both Facebok and Twitter without the account owner permission. It's also possible to alter messages and create new messages.

Facebook and Twitter is not completely private.

That said, if you apply for a job at my place the first thing I do is Google you.

They've been doing this a while. They checked my postings when I got my clearance.

NCOs would regularly monitor social media activity as well, and while deployed those controls were even tighter.

People in federal positions that require secret and above clearance are usually handling massive amounts of personal data already deemed confidential or secret. This includes the records of all Americans living and working in the US.

What would Hillary's Facebook page would say about her trustworthiness?

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: ColdWisdom
That said, if you apply for a job at my place the first thing I do is Google you.

You wouldn´t find anything about me, really nothing, zero! No pictures, no nothing, i am happy when people tell me they tried to find me in the web, and missed. Some people i didn´t see for years or even decades thought i am dead, because i am not to find in the whole web... xD

So, i wouldn´t get a job at your place, because i am a risk maybe?

a reply to: projectvxn

They've been doing this a while. They checked my postings when I got my clearance.

Just how long is a while?

Don’t see the issue.

They want to check to see if you blab everything on Facebook as those would be high risk to employ.

This is only for those applying for jobs requiring security clearance.
Some Invasion of privacy for vetting should be expected as part of that job.

a reply to: crazyewok

Don’t see the issue.

They want to check to see if you blab everything on Facebook as those would be high risk to employ.

This is only for those applying for jobs requiring security clearance.
Some Invasion of privacy for vetting should be expected as part of that job.

But as it has been pointed out, they have been utilizing this resource already. What I am saying is suspect is the choice to report it as news and how.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: Vector99

Yea the NSA can say they've been investigating every single person in the world all they want. But what good is it when we have things like the Boston Marathon Bombings & the San Bernardino shootings, two things that were completely preventable given the metadata tracked by the perpetrators prior to the tragedies?

Exactly. I never said I thought that was a good thing. We knew a huge terror attack was in the making and imminent once, yet 9/11 still happened.

You can watch all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time. But you cannot watch all of the people all the time.

if you dont have any are they gonna deem you cray cray? I recall reading a couple of years ago that avoidance of such was being conflagerated as some sort of mental disorder like falling under the antisocial personality disorder spectrum.

As much as I like people... sometimes I dont want to see or talk to any, in fact being a hermit is a pleasure I rather enjoy. Ive managed to not see another living person for at least a month and a half a few times a year, and I like it. I suppose the next step will be making artifical companions out of that senthetic dna chain business and force them on you if you want to be alone... so they can study and see what makes you tick and whats so wrong with people being so far in and up your business they could scratch you tonsils from the other end.

Wow nothing wrong with a connected world but I dont wanna be humancentipede connected who in a rational mind would?