Internet security – OPSEC

[little jim]

Food for thought for all you guys.

Of the four recent causalities in Afghanistan one of them had his photo on the net a couple of weeks before listing his name and that he was part of the Close Protection Party for Gen Fraser. 

Sort of helps the enemy with things like targeting, and indicators and a bunch of other army words.

Please think twice before you post.

Enemy is learning from his AARs and it is begining to hurt.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

You've got that right.  I hate to say it but perhaps curtailing the internet and monitoring phone calls may be in order.  Or make a severe example out of the next person you find opening his mouth to the wrong pers.

 

[JasonH]

Isn't that the job of the CSIS which they already do for this?

Seem's more of a failure on their part and the DOD's to keep up with the riseing demand when it comes to watching Blogs and the such.

 

[17thRecceSgt]

umm,  you mean DND right??

 

[COBRA-6]

Isn't that the job of the CSIS which they already do for this?

Seem's more of a failure on their part and the DOD's to keep up with the riseing demand when it comes to watching Blogs and the such.

I think CFL is talking about the unprecedented levels of connectivity that people overseas have to phone and internet connections. Great for welfare but poses OPSEC issues as well...

It's not CSIS's job to monitor what CF members post to the web... Al Quaeda members however...

 

[Journeyman]

Isn't that the job of the CSIS which they already do for this?

Ummm....you mean the CF National Counter-Intelligence Unit, right?

You typed two sentences, and managed to be wrong twice  - - 100%  Please feel free to read more and post less.

 

[JSR OP]

Perhaps the in camp CIS should be monitoring what pers are posting as well as what they are looking at.  They should be looking less at the porn the troops access, and pay more attention to what is being posted on web blogs, web pages, chat, etc..

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Mike yes that is what I meant.

 

[JasonH]

I see I finally for once bit off more than I could chew in a topic, I'm sorry for mixing up the CSIS with any other inter-service branch that would be doing this.

What I get for being a civilian, I don't know the inner workings of the military like I wish I would for topics like this.  My bad for assumeing, please can someone fill me in on the role of who's role it is to overlook responsibilities such as these for those who do break OPSEC rules.

 

[Journeyman]

...please can someone fill me in on the role of who's role it is to overlook responsibilities such as these for those who do break OPSEC rules.

Only because you said "please" (see kids? Courtesy is free, and it can pay benefits). From open sources only, have a look at:
Canadian Forces National Investigation Service
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=718

Canadian Forces National Counter-Intelligence Unit
http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/daod/8002/2_e.asp

As a very, very rough guideline, one can expect a knock on the door from CFNCIU if posting sensitive info for hostile purposes, and a CFNIS visit if it's just a troop being stupid. The "responsibility" for addressing the matter rests with the chain of command.

What I get for being a civilian, I don't know the inner workings of the military like I wish I would

Oh, you're a civilian....I see. I was confused by your using the CF's official Army avatar (is this where I say "my bad"?  I was raised by wolves, but they spoke passable English - - we seldom said "my bad"). Since you've only been a member here since November 2003, you possibly missed the memo on filling out your profile. Understandable; it rarely gets mentioned.

 

[Bzzliteyr]

Devil's advocate here, but wasn't the aforementioned picture from Combat Camera?

Journeyman, you sound like i do when I have to talk to my DP1 students with 7 months in the Army...hehe

 

[Journeyman]

Journeyman, you sound like i do when I have to talk to my DP1 students with 7 months in the Army...hehe

Bzzz, you use...shudder....sarcasm with troops? But we've been told (usually by whiners with low self-esteem and lower sexual appeal), that sarcasm is a poor leadership technique!  

 

[medicineman]

I find my troops appreciate my sarcasm  ;D (unless of course if it's directed at them...).

MM

 

[Haggis]

Bzzz, you use...shudder....sarcasm with troops? But we've been told (usually by whiners with low self-esteem and lower sexual appeal), that sarcasm is a poor leadership technique!  

Then somebody better slap me... and HARD!  :-[

 

[paracowboy]

Isn't that the job of the CSIS which they already do for this?

Seem's more of a failure on their part and the DOD's to keep up with the riseing demand when it comes to watching Blogs and the such.

No. It is the "job" of each and every individual soldier, sailor, and airman in the CF to behave in a professional, responsible manner and to use his/her head for something other than a place to store their head dress.
Nobody should have to police after soldiers in matters pertaining to OPSEC/PERSEC.
"Should" being the operative word.

 

[silentbutdeadly]

My take on OPSEC in Afghanistan,

Well we where doing this OP that we all heard ( OP PeaceMaker) and we were told OPSEC, OPSEC OPSEC, then well we get to our staging area for this OP, guess what i see, about 6 pers of media with cameras, SAT link up , Sat phones, doing reports right in front of us. We were kinda taking back by this and I won't say who bought them , but He's up there and since i have been talked to already by my higher ups about posting on here i must shut up now! Cheers 

 

[paracowboy]

My take on OPSEC in Afghanistan,

Well we where doing this OP that we all heard ( OP PeaceMaker) and we were told OPSEC, OPSEC OPSEC, then well we get to our staging area for this OP, guess what i see, about 6 pers of media with cameras, SAT link up , Sat phones, doing reports right in front of us. We were kinda taking back by this and I won't say who bought them , but He's up there and since i have been talked to already by my higher ups about posting on here i must shut up now! Cheers 

brother, I feel your pain. Next time you'e in Edmonton, we'll have a pint, and I'll tell you about taking a camera jockey on a stealth mission to take down a bad guy's compound.

 

[probum non poenitet]

I know it's ridiculous to have photographers and journalists in combat zones, but all wars democracies fight these days are "Two Front Wars".

You have the armed enemy in front of you, and a fickle public opinion behind you.

It is unlikely the enemy will ever overrun KAF with a combined arms assault.
But the ants (them) can beat the elephant (us) if they convince our governments to pull us out. This applies to Iraq and Afghanistan.

In an odd, odd way, the battle for public opinion is as unglamourous and uncoventional and as utterly vital as say ... say the Merchant Marine vs. the U-Boats in WW1 and 2.
Merchant Mariners weren't considered 'real' combatants, and submarines were a new facet to warfare.

But Churchill himself said the U-Boats were the only things that ever really worried him.

In a similar way (OK it's a stretch) I feel the only way we will lose this war, ie see Afghanistan and Iraq fail as states and Islamic Fundamental Terror surge and strike our homelands with renewed vigor, is if we lose the backing of the Canadian (and American and the rest of NATO) public opinion.

So in some ways, that public affairs weenie making all the noise on your patrol and pissing you off with his poor weapons handling is conceivably the most important guy there.

Ouch, that hurts to say ...