Classified Wiki For U.S. Intelligence Community 184
CortoMaltese noted that the U.S. intelligence community has unveiled their own classified wiki, the Intellipedia. Reuters says "The office of U.S. intelligence czar John Negroponte announced Intellipedia, which allows intelligence analysts and other officials to collaboratively add and edit content on the government's classified Intelink Web much like its more famous namesake on the World Wide Web.
A 'top secret' Intellipedia system, currently available to the 16 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community, has grown to more than 28,000 pages and 3,600 registered users since its introduction on April 17. Less restrictive versions exist for 'secret' and 'sensitive but unclassified' material."
For kicks, you can also read about Intellipedia on Wikipedia."
Well well well.... (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You have to admit that this is a good move for the intelligence community as a whole. ANY way for them to share a COMMON source of information is productive. Wasn't one of the main problems suspected behind the 9/11 committee's findings that there WASN'T enough communication and interoperability between branches of the intelligence sects
Re: (Score:1)
about as quickly as wikipedia became unreliable. (Score:2)
aside from the parrot wmd jab, why are our intelligence services so political anymore? When did this start? the late 60s and early 70s perhaps (vietnam etc) or did it become so after the mccarthy era?
then again, if any of the contributers to intellipedia read and post on
Re:about as quickly as wikipedia became unreliable (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
has the population of terrorists increased 300% in the past year??
I can't believe it's taken this long (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Think of spies - One spy gets into a high security clearance position, he has a complete list of all information, for which he might had to work for (or ask sub-ordinates) to obtain, in his fingertips.
I know they would have thought about it and provided adequate security for the same, but even then this is a little worrying developement.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But, wouldn't most of the people be interested in what is going on around the world, and go through most of the pages?
I know, I would. I regularly read wiki (for 1-2 hrs per day at the least) on most of the areas which I am remotely interested in.
And higher security clearance means that person is able - and able people do try to get in more information that others.
Not that these spies wont have such information otherwise, but this makes it much easier.
Also, the spy, who would have just contributed o
Another point of view (Score:2)
This, the repeal of Habius, Posse Comitatus, and amending the Insurrection Act all pave the way for a power grab unlike the world has ever seen.
Do you really think the government can be trusted not to abuse this system? Now one mistake in one file allows everyone from the White House to the cop down the street will allow them to arrest you because your name is in a shared system you can't access.
There should be a wall between the feds and the police. We're
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is a good thing to look at the technology and see if it is going to work.
Plus, they needed to make change to incorporate there own features.
Did you know... (Score:3, Funny)
Example WMDs Found (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly he did not and the diversion of troops, logistics from Afghanistan and the failure to conclude that campaign successfully before embarking on an ill-planed and ill-judged adventure has seriously harmed US interests, US prestige and US security.
The choice that we now face is whether the Mid
Re: (Score:2)
lol (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
1.77 metric tons of uranium... Well, near as anyone can tell this uranium was enriched to the point of usefulness for a reactor, but not for a fissile weapon. Not just any uranium is useful for a weapon. But come on, if you're going to play the pathetic "oh could have been for a dirty bomb" card, you should have played it with this. That uranium would be thousands of times easier to put in a dirty bomb than to enrich it for a nuclear weapon.
1,000 items of radio
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Wonder if they'll be smuggling them inside elephants.
This Is A Good Thing (Score:1, Interesting)
9/11 happened because we couldn't get different agencies and intelligence communities to work together. This sounds like something useful to prevent the next big suicide attack on the US.
Re: (Score:2)
"We must find and kill them before they can try to kill us"
Yes, everyone will agree with you once you've killed everyone who doesn't. It's a good job threats from the US don't put other countries on the defensive, and doesn't make people want to fight back.
Believe it or not, there are people out there with valid grievances about the way America conducts its business. Killing them doesn't make Americas actions, which their grievancie
Re: (Score:2)
I was actually commenting on the idea of stopping people who might try and kill by killing them.
Re: (Score:2)
Next will be insurance, credit, crime and health pedia.
More seriously, I think shared stores of information online have always existed in these departments, its only now they're calling it 'pedia' just as they're calling websites with text 'blogs' now.
Re: (Score:2)
If by "different intelligence agencies" you mean, for instance, the FBI and the FBI (no, that's not a typo), you are correct.
9/11 happened, despite things that should have been caught by the government, because existing intelligence and law enforcement agencies didn't effectively use the information and legal authority they had. Blaming it on poor coordination is largely a way to avoid any personal account
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Anything else is just a plot to assume as much power as possible for as few people as possible, and especially taki
Negroponte? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Need to Know (Score:4, Interesting)
This seems like they're skipping steps 2 and 3 all together. Now anyone with clearance can find out anything they want? Seems fishy to me...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Its a compromise between keeping the information locked in a safe and having humans judge it, then shipping it by federal carrier after judging whether you specifically have "need to know" and expediency of access to that information.
If anything is judged "too sensitive," then it is kept behind either a login or a
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Need to Know (Score:4, Interesting)
Modern day threats are different. Al-Quieda probably doesn't have a vast network of spies gaining access to our intelligence serivices, so it makes sense to open up the internal communication a bit to allow our own intelligence workers to be more efficient. While it does make a compromise that much more painful, the advantages gained through the information sharing probably outweigh the risks.
Re: (Score:2)
When the "big bad guy" was the Soviets, we had to assume that they had paid off at least some strategic people in every agency, or possibly even had plants, that allowed them some access to data that should otherwise be protected by our security clearance and secure data handing procedures.
That makes sense. I recently read an SF book that had a more extreme version of that notion as a key subplot. The situation was alien mechanized probes attacking the earth, and much of the research on countering the
Re: (Score:2)
You talk like Al-Qaeda is the only modern day threat.
Instead of a lengthy criticism of the rest of your post, I'll just point out that once you remove the assumption that "Al-Qaeda = the only modern day threat," the rest of your supporting statements don'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Without evidence to the contrary, there is no reason to assume that SCI or SSBI-level information is there for anyone with "confidential" clearance to see.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that every hit will be logged - providing a trail as well as data that could be mined to see who is looking at what and flag suspicious use. hell, that's better than a paper system where you really don't know who looks at what and where it's hard to connect the dots that someone is looking in multiple areas for information.
Hmm, Analyst xx looked at 10 articles o
Re: (Score:2)
SCI???? (Score:2)
Anything less and somebody needs to go to jail.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Intellinet eliminates the need for this three-step security process in an extremely elegant way. First, even if you've been given clearance and access, your login and password usually don't work. People with an actual need to know have to use somebody else's login information. Second, once you g
Excessive secrecy has costs too (Score:2)
Furthermore, a lot of the data that intelligence agencies use for analysis comes from open sources - reading fo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Link? (Score:2)
I would love to see what they have on this. I wonder if they use it to track individuals, each agecny adding their own knowledge. Could be useful.
On another issue, I wonder if these Agencies have really adopted a mandate to co-operate. It is really in their interests not too, and claim the glory themselves. Even when they fail, they just blame it on lack of funds, and get more money.
Torrent (Score:2)
BugMeNot (Score:2)
Wow (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Knowledge Base Software (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Gasp! (Score:1)
Secure (Score:1)
Obligatory (Score:2)
(cur) (last) 01:31, 24 October 2006 DodDude(Talk | contribs) (added pt a/b selling drugs in inner city)
New admin procedures (Score:2)
From Intellipedia, the classified encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Unblock a user, or view the list of active blocks.
This is a log of user-block/unblock actions. Auto-blocked IP addresses are not listed here. See the IP block list for the list of currently operational blocks. See Intellipedia talk:Block log for discussion. Note that the "User" field is case-sensitive.
View (previous 50) (next 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500).
As an added security feature ... (Score:4, Funny)
But really, if it's so top secret, how come the whole world knows about it?
Geez, now, everybody's going to want one. I can see it now, there'll be an Al' Qaedapedia next.
Re: (Score:2)
I know the pentagon exists, but I don't know what's written on all of the documents within it. I think that's the important bit.
Re: (Score:2)
I think at worst you're splitting hairs, and at best you're interpreting an ambigious sentence in the not-intended way. A "top secret content management system" could be read as "a [top secret content] management system", or "a [top secret content management system]" easily enough.
"The Intellipedia is essentially a document"
No, it's a system that will hold, index, and manage documents, an
Re: (Score:2)
Article | Discussion | Edit this page | + | History | Move | Watch
Talk:Future Plans
Contents [hide]
1 Added possible plot
2 Page needs cleanup
Added possible plot
I added the "underwear bomber" idea. The shoes thing worked, let's see if we can get them to take off their underwear at the airport! - AlMusari 10:14, Oct 14, 2006 (UTC)
Page needs cleanup
IMHO, we need to clean up this page to better organize our thoughts. Please complete the entries for future plans with specific information about partic
Re: (Score:2)
hehe
Re: (Score:2)
Geez, now, everybody's going to want one. I can see it now, there'll be an Al' Qaedapedia next.
It's a wiki. I can't get excited by them any more. I think it's a good idea and will be useful for those that need to access it for intel. The first thing that I thought of when you said that everyone will want one is that they'll make wiki-rumor-pedia. Forget the standards of wikipedia, if its a rumor or you just want to do a community blo
Revert wars! (Score:2)
-- 3.2003 entry on Iraq weapons of mass distruction.
Intelligence officer with fief to protect: "Lame."
A sample classified doc from Intellopedia (Score:2, Funny)
Iraq, an evil empire, is a country of
vast oil fields ruled ruthlessly by Saddam Hussein. Since the first Gulf war,
Re: (Score:2)
On a platter? (Score:2, Interesting)
One database with thousands of user accounts, remotely accessible, each account has full viewing access, the information is displayed in an easy to copy format ready to be picked clean by a single compromised account. One key logger, one leak, one vulnerability and it's all gone, that to me seems rather risky.
Now like I said, I don't know if it would
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Don't like it - Just click edit (Score:1)
--
sig withheld by request
Re: (Score:2)
Excellent lack of getting it! Try again once you understand the differences between intel, analysis thereof, and briefings for policy makers based on those two things.
"unveiled"? (Score:2)
Really? (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
"How, exactly, can one 'unveil' a classified, secret project?"
I don't know how it works, but I used to get messages all the time like "Gaia's Stepdaughters have begun a secret project called 'The Self-Aware Colony'" and stuff like that. Maybe I just had good probe teams, and occasionally I was planetary governor.
RE: unveil (Score:2)
Easy: they're hypocrites, you oxymoron.
What we really want to know... (Score:3, Funny)
Malware (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Might be a good idea... (Score:2)
It has the risk, though, like Wikipedia that people will use it without going to the source information, when th
Finally a place... (Score:2)
Yes! I love it! (Score:2)
The authoritative source on US foreign policy that anyone can edit!
Which really explains a lot...
For kicks (Score:2)
I think I'd rather read about Wikipedia on Intellipedia.
Re: (Score:2)
They're just trying to be honest for a change. They thought it would be easier to start with something everybody knows anyway.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your point is still a good one.
Re: (Score:2)
Note: this is not a real opinion. If it had been a real opinion, you would have been informed as to where to put it. Thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you know that? I bet there was still a $12Billion dollar appropriation and an army of consultants... seriously... really. I've worked for the government.... nothing gets done without an army of consultants and _lots_ o cash.
Friedmud
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of cause it would... because they would give write access to the wiki to governments of countries they're about to invade, who would be able to correct the articles to say "we got nuffin boss".
Re: (Score:2)
Right. Because there certainly aren't any career people in the intel community who happen to sit on the other side of the idealogical spectrum, right (see: Valerie Plame, etc).
You aren't, by any chance, anywhere nearly as ignorant as you're pretending to be, are you? Because as annoying as pretending to be that way is, actually being that way is much, much worse.
Re: (Score:2)