Other Directory Sites: SeekWonder | Directory Owners Forum
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:18:05
Daniel J. Frasnelli (dfrasnel@csee.wvu.edu)
Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:34:01 -0500 (EST)
> Does SCI, or for that matter *any* type of DoD clearance apply
Guess my previous message did not get to the mailing list yet.
SCI, "secure compartmentalized information", authorizes you to work in a
certain type of work environment. To the best of my knowledge, SCI is
neither limited to DoD nor the U.S. government.
> to non-DoD crypto work done in such areas as Research.ATT.com? I know
> I'm "harping" on this little point, but after all, this is *the* point
> upon which you entire posture lives or dies...
A co-worker explained the process and likely situation at AT&T
this way:
If a research lab is developing a crypto/other security product
for the DoD, chances are that the cryptographers and coders do not
themselves need security clearances. The research lab, after completion
of a preliminary version of the product, submits the software to the DoD
for certification (eg. "testing"). If the software fails, it is sent
back. If not, it moves onto other certification or is brought into
mainstream use.
As my colleague points out, chances are that the folks at AT&T's
research lab doing crypto hold at least one form or another of DoD TS/SCI
clearances by virtue of the average experience level there. Keep in mind
also that a clearance from one agency does not entitle you to privy
information held by another agency. If Agent X holds clearance foobar
with Agency Y, he or she cannot waltz over to Agency Z and go through
their filing cabinets.
Coming from the Washington, D.C. area, I learned early on that two
things come "cheap" (ie. everyone holds one or knows someone who does):
PhD's and security clearances.
Daniel
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:18:05