Discord leaks show classified vetting needs reform. Here's what should happen. - Breaking Defense...

As someone who filled out his 1st SF86 in '86, this is an interesting article. If the investigator is worth their salt though, they're already doing the online checks. The extra categories would only make it easier. I agree with MSgt Dale Johnson, it's up to the local leaders and SSO at the point of interaction

Whole heartedly disagree with the entire thing.

He makes a couple false assumptions and ignores a great deal.

First, people are different online than they are in person.
Second, tracking down those online contacts is going to be very VERY difficult. "Yeah, I talk with squeakywheel108 all the time. Who is that? I don't know. Their phone number? Address? E-mail? I don't know. I can't tell you when he - or is ol' squakers a she? - will be online, either. They kind of pop in and out."
Third, if they are looking at transcripts, tone does not convey. "Yeah, right" can be contemplative, supportive, contemptive, or ambivalent.
Fourth, this gives big government one more tool for continual tracking. Sure, while folks are in a sensitive position, that may be warranted. But does anyone REALLY believe they government will delete your info and stop watching you after you leave the service? Does anyone REALLY believe this info will be neither stolen nor leaked?
Fifth, AI can generate just about anything at this point. Expanding to digital searches creates a massive vulnerability to exploitation of planted "evidence."
Sixth, prior to repeal of DADT, yes, homosexuality was a perfectly valid reason for withholding a clearance.
Seventh, anyone with half a brain will simply not give out their online handles. Or at least not the ones they use in the /r/DownWithAmerica group.
8th the problem is not the internet as the author says, but the digital nature of the Intel itself. The Pentagon Papers took a massive operation involving hours upon hours to gather the data and a truck to move it. That can be done in 5 minutes with a thumb drive these days.
9th, the problem is exponentially exacerbated by our government's compulsive need to overclassify and their illegal classification of things based on embarrassment rather than national security. When I crossed over to MI, only half the MOSs had TS clearances. I had a secret right up until I became a senior NCO. 10 years later, every single MI MOS has a TS with SCI access. Almost everyone is read on to the 4 major caveats, and half of the MI folks - yes, even the E2s - are read on to SAPs.
Infantry PFCs are running around with Secret clearances. Not TOC privates or RTOs or even armorers. Light Infantry SAW gunners. Stryker drivers. Bradley dismounts. Infantry S3 NCOs with TS clearances because "OMG battle plans."

When you overclassify everything, more people need clearance - and HIGHER clearance - just to do their jobs.



I had more points to make, but I forgot them.

Anyway, this is a bad idea.

Excellent article. Recall, back in the way-back, learning things about my circle I had previously not known. Not sure I agree with his tying Edward Snowden to this latest kid in terms of motivation. Quote "Since Edward Snowden (and likely extending to junior National Guardsman Jack Teixeira, the alleged leaker in the current scandal), the most damaging leaks of classified information have been related to an affinity for and influence by online groups, not foreign powers. Thus the intentions of the individuals responsible would have been discernible more by their online presence than by what they might have said to a neighbor." Unquote