Military Bans YouTube, MySpace, and Other Sites
Are YouTube and MySpace a security risk? According to the U.S. Defense Department if you are in the U.S. military and accessing them from military-run network they are. The Defense Department is now blocking access to YouTube, MySpace, and nearly a dozen other Web sites from computers on its network calling them a "significant operational security challenge."
According to an operational security guidelines (OPSEC) memo issued last week by Gen. B. B. Bell the move is meant to reduce drag on the department's networks and protect information. Sites banned include: Metacafe, IFilm, StupidVideos and FileCabi, BlackPlanet, Hi5, Pandora, MTV, 1.fm, live365, and Photobucket.
I'm not surprised. It's really been astonishing that the military has allowed soldiers to have such freewheeling access, especially uploading video to YouTube. But I am surprised that some of their concerns that appear to extend to the media.
OPSEC Guidelines Targets Bloggers and Media
For more behind the scenes insight into how the military views bloggers and even the media check the Army's operational security guidelines as outlined in the slideshow "OPSEC in the Blogosphere". I ran across this gem earlier this month at Wired's "Danger Room" blog. Noah Shachtman found the Army's new operational security guidelines as a slideshow.
A slide from the OPSEC document ranks "Categories of Threat" and under "traditional domestic threats" is the media right alongside hackers, militia groups, and drug cartels.
Under the heading "Concerns & Issues" the document states: "Providing information which enhances the enemy's targeting process." It adds that posting "sensitive" photos and information may be "therapeutic, they are also a snap-shot in time and the whole world is reading."
(From "OPSEC in the Blogosphere" slideshow)
PC World's Marketplace
PC World's Free Whitepapers
tech news tech blogs community & forums laptop prices software reviews downloads
Look, these guys were signed up in order to give their lives, if necessary, to preserve our democratic rights.
Obviously they don't deserve those same rights themselves.
Forget about oversight & review to make sure the posts aren't "Providing information which enhances the enemy's targeting process." They deserve no access whatsoever. Besides, the media is the enemy of US security. Those "embedded" stenographers are the fifth column.
"Look, these guys were signed up in order to give their lives"
It was their choice. They volunteered.
"Obviously they don't deserve those same rights themselves."
You have got to be freaking kidding me. Please explain where this RIGHT to post on the Internet is written. Thanks.
Oh, and also try to grasp that operational security is more important than a soldier's entertainment choices. That you would place the priority the other way around is astonishing and shows a lack of common sense.
"Forget about oversight & review"
Yes. Forget about it. The government has enough problems - and now you think they should expend valuable resources (including YOUR money) to read and edit soldiers' posts online? Then, of course, you'll complain about THAT as a breach of privacy.
Think about it this way: being a soldier is aj ob. The military is the employer. When you sit at your desk at work, who decides what you can and can't do? Your employer. It's basic common sens
The internet is just another forum for freedom of speech. It sucks to be one of the people that thinks before they post and uses these sites to communicate with loved ones back home only to have it taken away by the people that don't have a full grasp of opsec.
Pandora? Seriously, pandora? It's streaming music. You can't upload anything to pandora. Unless you're breaching security with clever station descriptions or song ratings there's literally no way to use pandora to harm security.
Some of these sites have a lot to do with network resources. Example: it's difficult to get a video on to a work computer number one) because you have to take the video gear to work, number two) there's likely no video editing software on the computer. So there's very little chance that you could get a video on the computer to upload to youtube in the first place. However- downloading videos can use up considerable bandwidth.
Yes, being a soldier, sailor, airman, or marine is a job. But I doubt you've ever spent 6 solid months at work w/o going home or being face to face with family.
I understand restricting access in the name of security. But some of that is pure bollox. Upgrade the infrastructure, hire more sysadmins and restrict access.
I understand the military being concerned about sensitive material becoming posted on the net. I don't know where I stand on this one really though. Should our soldiers be trusted? Do they take oaths of service or fill out forms/contracts equivalent to non-disclosure? But at the same time I can see that prevention of possible breaches that can potentially pose a security risk would be more preferrable than allowing soldiers multiple lines of communication to loved ones and friends. It's all about trade-offs. What's more important: moral or security?
-DatONEfoo
"The internet is just another forum for freedom of speech."
There are already myriad laws which restrict the speech of soldiers and non-soldiers alike. Free speech is not absolute. I'm sick of people hiding behind this misnomer.
" It sucks to be one of the people that thinks before they post and uses these sites to communicate with loved ones back home only to have it taken away by the people that don't have a full grasp of opsec."
Again, our soldiers are volunteers. You don't get to volunteer for something and then complain about the conditions YOU signed up for.
"The internet is just another forum for freedom of speech."
There are already myriad laws which restrict the speech of soldiers and non-soldiers alike. Free speech is not absolute. I'm sick of people hiding behind this misnomer.
" It sucks to be one of the people that thinks before they post and uses these sites to communicate with loved ones back home only to have it taken away by the people that don't have a full grasp of opsec."
Again, our soldiers are volunteers. You don't get to volunteer for something and then complain about the conditions YOU signed up for. The idea that this will restrict soldiers' communications with their families is ludicrous. They still have phones, email, and written letters they can use to communicate. I think many people's idea of military life is still "Vietnamized" - which is about as inaccurate as it can get.
"The internet is just another forum for freedom of speech."
There are already myriad laws which restrict the speech of soldiers and non-soldiers alike. Free speech is not absolute. I'm sick of people hiding behind this misnomer.
" It sucks to be one of the people that thinks before they post and uses these sites to communicate with loved ones back home only to have it taken away by the people that don't have a full grasp of opsec."
Again, our soldiers are volunteers. You don't get to volunteer for something and then complain about the conditions YOU signed up for. The idea that this will restrict soldiers' communications with their families is ludicrous. They still have phones, email, and written letters they can use to communicate. I think many people's idea of military life is still "Vietnamized" - which is about as inaccurate as it can get.
Sorry about the multiple post. PCWorld's system is very slow. I guess I shouldn't have clicked submit again when it didn't go through. I'm very surprised they don't check for duplicate posts. Anyway, sorry about that...
"Free speech is not absolute"
Free speech sure as hell IS absolute. On your own time. On your own computers. On your own network. Try reading your copy of the constitution.
I f these soldiers choose to use their OWN computers, their OWN internet access, and on their OWN free time...that's their business.
If anybody deserves the protection of the constitution, it is these men and women fighting to PROTECT the constitution.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Any persons rights extend until they interfere with another persons rights. The military doesn't need to provide enlistees with computer/internet access, that has nothing at all to do with freedom of speech.
I approve of the military putting restrictions on the sites that their networks access but to block certain websites and call it "security" is crap. I think that in the name of morale there could (should?) be un-restricted (monitored of course) computers that are available off duty. Restrict the work computers all you want, they're *work* computers after all.
Just don't lie, that's stupid.
My niece is shipping out to Iraq today, fresh out of boot camp. But don't think for an instant I support the military's censorship of these websites, and I certainly don't support the war.
It's hard for me to believe that the world's best-funded military isn't able to provide decent bandwidth, and censorship is nothing new. No, I think the military is more interested in keeping its soldiers from seeing the anti-war videos and the videos put out by the war-ravaged Iraqis. But I feel the morale the military saves by doing so will be greatly overshadowed by the morale lost because soldiers are more out of touch with family.
See my blog post at: http://angrylabrat.blogspot.com/2007/05/no-videos-for-troops.html.
The ban is described as applying to government-owned, not personal, computers and is presented at least in part as a bandwith issue. My guess would be that many employers would block sites such as those mentioned from company-owned computers. As for uploading, it's easy to inadvertently give away information that is insignificant in itself but which can be meaningful to an enemy when combined with other information available to him. As for free speech, military personnel have always been allowed to have and express opinions, but not in any way which identifies the speaker with the government of the United States. And as for personal freedom, when I was active duty, every installation had a list of establishments which soldiers were prohibited from visiting.
Gary Williams
you people are ignorant! EXTREMELY IGNORANT!!!!!!!!!!!! use your gd common sense, the soldiers are being limited as to where they can post to protect themselves and our country and it's citizens! think! think! think! would you tell America's enemies our secrets if you knew it could mean the complete fall and destruction of America? I served my time in the military and know perfectly well what I am talking about. So those who say "freedom of speech", you are as stupid as they come. use your frickin' common sense! just because you have the right to say anything you want doesn't mean compromising the safety, security, and well being of any entity! so shut the "f" u to all those "i want my rights, but don't want to be responsible in exercising them" people. It almost sickens me to think that I laid my life on the line for you kind of people.
No "WMDs". Afghanistan was invaded to restore CIA / Mossad opium trafficking profits curtailed by the Taliban; Iraq was attacked and neutered as it was perceived as a threat to Israel. The $8.8 billion swindled from the Oil-for-Food fund was just a bonus.
Decent, honorable folk in the "Coalition" services have a responsibility to their compatriots and to themselves, not to some demented clique of genocidal treasonous soulless misfits who just happen to have assumed control. It is now their duty to arrest the psychopaths who pose as 'leaders' in our governments, and to bring them to trial for crimes against humanity. Why should our soldiers continue to sacrifice their lives or health and wellbeing merely to enrich and empower a network of nutjobs? The world must never again become the equivalent of a giant lunatic asylum, with the decent, honest majority terrorised and exploited by a psychopathic minority.
See: http://www.takeourworldback.com/short/911psychos.htm
Wow. People like Poseidon are a scary lot. Totally gullible to conspiracy theories and crackpot ideas. Seek help, dude.
""Free speech is not absolute"
Free speech sure as hell IS absolute. "
Um, not it's not. The basic example: you can't yell FIRE! in a crowded theater. There are many restrictions on speech in this country. Freedom of speech is not absolute, no matter what you think.
It's amazing, and sad, how many people in this country don't understand what rights really are.
"On your own time. On your own computers. On your own network. Try reading your copy of the constitution."
Wow. You are the one who needs to read it.
"I f these soldiers choose to use their OWN computers, their OWN internet access, and on their OWN free time"
um, what happened to where you said "On your own network"? do the soldiers have their own personal networks? no.
"...that's their business."
no, it's government business because they are government employees.
"Put that in your pipe and smoke it."
You need to put down the pipe.
The ignorance in this country is astounding and concerning.