YouTube Used for Whistleblowing 407
fightmaster writes "A Lockheed Martin engineer with concerns about the safety and security flaws in a fleet of refurbished Coast Guard patrol boats turned to YouTube in order to publicize concerns he felt were being ignored by his employer and the government. From the article: 'The 41-year-old Lockheed Martin engineer had complained to his bosses. He had told his story to government investigators. He had called congressmen. But when no one seemed to be stepping up to correct what he saw as critical security flaws in a fleet of refurbished Coast Guard patrol boats, De Kort did just about the only thing left he could think of to get action: He made a video and posted it on YouTube.com.'"
Or... QWZX (Score:0, Interesting)
If the employer AND the government AND the congressman AND apparently no one else will listen to this boob, maybe, just maybe, his issue ain't that important and he should quit bellyaching.
How does he walk with balls that big? (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, this dude has some balls, if not much sense. Tip for all you would-be whistleblowers: make sure you have the facts, the media, and God (not necessarily) overwhelmingly on your side before you start. Otherwise, you're just screwed. I hope the guy can find another job, or get a book deal. De Kort, thanks for taking one for the team.
Possible Retribution? (Score:3, Interesting)
Once Again, Internet Levels Playing Field (Score:3, Interesting)
Power to the people!
2 cents,
QueenB
Home of the Brave (Score:1, Interesting)
IMO, this is more evidence that Bush's "War on Terror" is nothing more than a facade designed to cover up one of history's biggest robberies. What's a suitable punishment for someone who hijacks a country of 300 million with lies, crimes and stolen elections? GWB should be drawn and quartered on the Washington Mall.
Re:Once Again, Internet Levels Playing Field (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:His points... (Score:3, Interesting)
As someone who DESIGNS things that ACTUALLY ARE required to work at -40 deg C, I can say that it is MORE than a specsmanship thing.
To put it simply, a system is more than the sum of its components. Every part in your system could even be certified to operate at -40 C, but unless the whole system is designed that way, there's still a good chance that it won't work right.
A simple example here would be electrolytic capacitors. Sure they're almost all "rated" for low temperature operation but they also loose a sizeable percentage of their capacitance at low temperatures. This means that the system must be intentionally designed to account for this.
Re:His points... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:YouTube Video Link (Score:4, Interesting)
And the real problem... who will take action? It's not anybody's job to fix fvck-ups.
There are tons of outstanding engineers and managers who really care at Lockheed and the other companies involved. This project probably didn't get many of them.
Here's my own personal similar story. Remember the BFV (Bradley Fighting Vehicle... which eventually became a good unit, I think). One of my first jobs was building the analog circuit to integrate the signal from gas gyros in a 'pistol' control. The tank commander would in theory pull the pistol and shoot it at an enemy. The result would be the gun turning automatically and sighting in on the target. The probem was that the gas-gyros drifted... a LOT. By the time you made a system semi-useful, it was only good for a few seconds out of the 'holster' at a time. The electronics took up a cubic foot INSIDE the BFV, and generated a LOT of heat. There was no way that system was going to be reliable.
I recommended that they give the tank commander a joy-stick instead (reliable, low heat, low volume, darned cheap). Guess how far that went
Re:His points... (Score:4, Interesting)
As one guy on a big team, he's not going to see a lot of testing.... but my main point was that temperature ranges for "Automotive spec" cover down to -40, and often, we are faced with being unable to get the part rated at the spec; this isn't because the part not rated for the spec won't work, and work reliably, it's because automotive temp ratings require a LOT of certification, and costs a LOT of money. You can build a motherboard with every chip and part, except ONE CAPACITOR, rated for automotive temp, and the motherboard technically FAILS the rating, even if it can pass the temperature extremes in an environmental testing box and under duration. So here, I sympathize with Lockheed Martin's team based on my own experience, and also know that none of the systems I've been a part of for automotive (same temperature extremes he quotes) have EVER failed because of temperature extremes - and that's hundreds of thousands in vehicles world wide (Canada to Saudi Arabia).
Humidity is another problem, and again, certification is very long, expensive, and many suppliers forego this. Sometimes, it's impossible to build a system with rated components simply because of avialability - the parts you need just have never been certified. That is a big difference from components that CANNOT operate at those ranges.
Re:A Fine Example... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Couple of old sayings come to mind (Score:4, Interesting)
You don't need Youtube to expose things. Free Geocities websites have been available for a decade or so. The popularity and exposure of the Internet perhaps came too late for Challenger, but as Columbia was orbiting there were emails going between engineers and management, saying the launch videos show something hitting the orbiter, let's have a big telescope look at it in orbit to see if it's okay. Management nixed the idea, though it had been done on early shuttle flights when tiles were a concern. If these concerns had been made public on a Geocities page, perhaps things would have been different.
Re:His points... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:A Fine Example... (Score:5, Interesting)
ignorance is abundant (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:A Fine Example... (Score:3, Interesting)
If what this guy is saying in his video is true, Lucy's got some 'splainin' to do.
On the other hand, this guy could be a flake or he could be lying.
Very often, on these kinds of contracts, it turns out that the requirements just can't be met. It's an impossibility, or there isn't enough money left, whoever did the proposal may have done his or her due-diligence, but upon undertaking the actual engineering task, it turns out not to be feasible - for whatever reason. In these cases, the contractor goes back to the negotiating table and gets a waiver or exemption, etc. and they move on - often at a penalty. It's possible that LockMart did this, and this guy was not told about it, and instead was just told to chill. Maybe he assumed that there was wrongdoing going on when he was just not informed.
The kinds of programs I've worked, and the people I've worked with, I find it very difficult to believe it has happened exactly the way he said - there are two sides to every story. Then again, I've heard some pretty detailed stories about some of the contractor fraud that's been going on among playas like Titan, MZM, etc. They must have a different set of rules than what I've ever seen. I can't understand how any of these yo yo's get into the front door at the Pentagon. And then there's Boeing's recent issues (Tanker-lease program, United Launch Alliance, etc.). Just don't know what to think sometimes.
How About Some Respect? (Score:2, Interesting)
I have a dream in which the military and the hippies in America come together to fight those who are interested ONLY in their own power and money.
I too feel that such speech is dangerous. But I Respect this man more than I repsect my fear.
I believe his story. It sounds very, very true to me. I am not willing to say that it "is" true. But it fits perfectly with my perception of Lockheed Martin and "the military industrial complex". If you think you know what "the military industrial complex" is, please: don't. Listen to Eisenhower's words [americanrhetoric.com] and then think about what they mean.
Please don't kill me.
Re:This might be usefull: (Score:5, Interesting)
I personally think it is rather commendable, and while I think the short term will be rough for him, hopefully it can bring to light other issues that the coast guard has been glossing over. My dad was in the navy and road an icebreaker on a trip up near the North Pole. If equipment was not rated to survive in the cold weather, they were basically useless to the crew.
Keep it up, you have media attention now, and thanks to midterm elections, something might actually be done about it.
Re:rebuttal (Score:2, Interesting)
YouTube: The new Consumer Affairs (Score:2, Interesting)
I used YouTube to voice a complaint against Freedom Furniture several months ago, after they sold me a "Laptop Table" that promptly destroyed my laptop. Freedom Furniture wouldn't cooperate in fixing the damage their product directly caused, so I released the video to the public.
Watch the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ly0-Vbqyby8 [youtube.com]
While not even remotely original in concept, it's an effective method of getting a warning out.
Microsoft kills (Score:3, Interesting)
Management nixed the idea, because they never "got it" in the first place. And in this particular case, it was not management's fault for being dense, but the engineer's for choosing to do a powerpoint presentation [washingtonpost.com] rather than plainly saying to management: "Houston, we have a huge problem, and we need to do something about it now".
Predictably, management dosed off during the boring powerpoint presentation, and only learned about the tiles when they saw the accident coverage on CNN...
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:3, Interesting)
It all hinges on the merit of the claims, which we can't validate.
Re:I am a DoD Contract Program Manager (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Lockheed Martin is an inferior company (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Lockheed Martin is an inferior company (Score:1, Interesting)
The communications flaws are the most obvious, in that, I'm sure communication standards are put into place by the DOD.
Especially if communication is also between other depts. that handle sensitive information.
I, personally, think this is potentially a very big issue, and should be corrected, regardless of cost.
Re:Wow a TubeCast! (Score:1, Interesting)
In response to security cameras:
It's called a security theatre. What is already equiped has the impact of making it look like they are stepping up security to prepare for a "post 9/11 world" *rolls eyes*. Their job is not to provide air-tight security because the threat does not justify the expense. The blindspots could be a result of oversight, or a calculated cost cutting measure. In either case, no manager is going to put their neck on the line by coming up with another expensive project, when the sole justification is trying to defend against phantom boogeymen. If the problem is just ignored, they would have plausible deniability that: "No one could have predicted a breech via those blind spots." in the extremely unlikely event of this becoming an issue. That is, if it wasn't for some busy-body whistle blower. You would be doing yourself a favor by understanding this reasoning and respecting the chain of command. The only potential benifit you can hope for would be alarming the public to the point that the problem is fixed and you are given a symbolic promotion and a pat on the back. At that point you had better be happy with that position because you're going nowhere from there.
In response to the infrared equipment:
Same response essentially. They will probably use the money they saved by not drawing attention to the fact that none of the boats meet that requirment, to retrofit the proper equipment on to the boats that actually need it. The decision is once again most likely a calculated intentional ignorance that you are fucking up.
Shielded cables:
Are you kidding? TEMPEST? Whose KGB ties are you worried about? Jose the drug runner? Or Osama bin Laden's? Yeah you can build your own box, but that is not the modus operandi of anyone the Coast Guard is trying to defend against. Once again though, now that you've drawn attention to that fact, joe hacker idiot is going to make a project out of it, complain when he gets arrested, and heads will role above you for A: not shutting you up, and B: Not fixing the problem after you didn't shut up. It doesn't even matter if Joe Hacker succeeds against all odds because his arrest will result in a review of the boats in either case. So once again, congratualations for second guessing people more in touch with the real world than yourself.
The last one is just a summary. In short, this type of obliviousness, and try hard good intentions do more to undermine security than the problems they highlight because they result in money originally allocated based on threat assessment, needing to be reallocated based on politics now that they no longer have plausible deniability to cover their ass. The road to hell is paved in good intentions. When your cute little boats are secure, and a subway train explodes out of view of your blinders, you can feel good that your whistle-blowing kept your boat safe.
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Or... QWZX (Score:2, Interesting)