Changing the Organizational Culture

[Tom Odom]

The Info Assurance team here has concluded that in order to prevent inadvertent compromise of information, we should disconnect all our computers from the web (NIPR) and work as stand-alones. Then, in the unlikely event we needed to communicate with anyone outside the office, cleared couriers would be the appropriate transmission medium LOL.

Nooooo not couriers. They might talk to someone along the way...

Carrier pigeons are the answer!

Semaphore flags and mirrors as back up.

Maybe we could just set bonfires as in Lord of the Rings

[marct]

Hi Rob,

Are we so worried about our networks being compromised that we are willing to give up significant capability to inter-act with the rest of the world in the environment we're going to operate in? Are we going to limit are research and collection to officially approved sources? Are we going to quietly talk amongst ourselves behind the curtain - where no one can hear us disagree or tell us that anything we don't want to hear? How about the opportunity to draw on a broader segment of knowledge then available inside a room (however large we claim the room to be)? Are we going to create an insular culture that is afraid of engagement?

Well, let's just take a bird's eye view of the new policies...

[Rob Thornton]

This is one of those things that show the complex operational environment we operate in. One aspect of the environment - the security of electronic information gets focused on to the point where its importance becomes exclusive to the rest of the operating environment. Actions taken to address that one aspect of the environment then ripple across others with disrupting, albeit unintended consequences.

This is where we get into the stove pipe thinking - and wind up constraining ourselves. Its kind of like focusing all efforts on maintaining the MSRs while allowing the enemy uncontested access to the population. Not only do we have to worry about the enemy's IO and communication capability, we enable him by our castrating actions taken against ourselves. As that really smart guy said - "we've got to do a better job of considering those things which can't be counted, but often count the most."

Best, Rob

[Tom Odom]

Its kind of like focusing all efforts on maintaining the MSRs while allowing the enemy uncontested access to the population.

You are a smart guy, Rob. That is exactly right.

Tom

[Ron Humphrey]

You are a smart guy, Rob. That is exactly right.

Tom

One thing I was talking to someone about a while back keeps coming to me in this regard. Information is like light in that too much or too little will often result in the same thing. Blindness.

By limiting the access points in any given information point we may accomplish some security but when you look at it how much?
Criminals or bad guys tend to look for the valuables behind locked doors because thats usually where they are kept. This means that Mr or Mrs evil person are going to have an easier time finding what they are looking for because we have done them the favor of marking it do not enter.

If there are few or no locked doors then whoever is searching for the " good stuff " will have to open each and every door in order to find what they are looking for. This in turn heightens the likelihood that they are confronted by that helpful greeter who asks, May I Help You, hence being more likely that they are identified before accomplishing their evil deed.

I realize that there are counters to this which are very important and must be considered but it just seem that the more that is in the open the greater the chance that we see what we need to and they have a harder time finding it without getting caught.

[Hacksaw]

I have watched this thread evolve with great interest. I work at Mother Leavenworth and have had several occassions to engage/brief/listen with/to Frontier 6. His actions and words reinforce this perspective each time he meets with students, Soldiers and subordinate leaders. For the most part, the discussion on this topic moved towards the nazi DOIM thugs who think we can actually control info, a perspective that has been unanimously debunked by all. It is ironic that we build this entire framework of commo/C2 capabilities so as to enable network enabled command, and then we hobble that same system with overly restrictive precautions. That said, as important a thought in the original piece is the need to engage in the public forum/debate. We have to tell our own narrative, once upon a time we might have thought that the PAO Corps would handle this "distasteful" task, but they have evolved into little more than agents for the media. This is purely anecdotal, but in every instance I have found that COL-level PAO sees their mission as facilitating access as opposed to having (in my case) the Army story told effectively/accurately. We can be open and yet still "shape" media coverage by exposing those writers to a well-balanced collection of Soldiers. This might take persuassion, but it seems PAO as an organizational culture have removed themselves from the "fight". How sad, especially if you buy into the idea that this is long war of ideas. I hate depressing myself with reality on a Friday. Live well and row

[Abu Suleyman]

Having had some experience in the blogosphere maintaining an elicit blog and working with IO in theatre (all of this in the past, BTW) I would like to share some observations that may be a little impolitic.

1) I have long said that the problem in Iraq, and other theatres, is not that there are too many journalists (as I have heard some soldiers complain), but that there are not enough. Many journalists have the ‘pigeon’ style and it is a two edged sword. If you fly in and you see no attacks and no problems you believe that everything is hunk dory, and your reporting will reflect that, if you are an honest reporter. If you are attacked even once, you are likely to believe that things are not well, and report in accordance with that perspective. There is no real perspective with short visits and a few interviews.

Having soldiers ‘blog’ circumvents that problem. Written well, and with proper perspective a web log will tell a true and representative story. It will take into account most if not all of the complex factors involved in war. That will paint a more accurate picture of what is going on.

2) As unpopular as it may be to admit this but the majority of the Iraq War, and many preceding wars, is being fought not on the battle field but in the living rooms across America. Essentially, America’s military might is incontestable for now, and the only hope of winning is by fighting an IO campaign within our own borders. By releasing and encouraging our soldiers to web log we are encouraging them to wage an IO campaign back home.

3) There are several problems with a soldier-run IO campaign, not the least of which is literacy. As much as we may not like it, a significant portion of soldiers are functionally illiterate. I remember reading sworn statements by officers and enlisted soldiers that seemed to be written by a mentally handicapped child. In one instance the S-3 SGM who was investigating an incident called me into his office so that we could try and figure out what one particular sworn statement meant, and we both broke down laughing. In retrospect there was nothing funny about the ignorance that was manifest on the page, especially since the soldiers in question were both good men, but it was a representation of a major issue that exists in the military.

4) The blogosphere is the wild, wild west. People will listen to who they want to and take only the examples of what they already believe seriously. That isn’t to say that it doesn’t help to have more ideas out there, but people will treat information like a buffet, and they will give no credence to what they don’t agree with. Moreover, once you say something, it is out there for anyone to do whatever they want to it. I had several things that I said in good faith taken an construed into horrific mean spirited things. I have since tried to be much more guarded in what I say, but it may take soldiers a while to learn that lesson.

5) Along those same lines, OPSEC is a nightmare in our military. Even with all of the regulations, I know that you can track movements of troops with nothing more than a MySpace account and some time. We already leak like a sieve, and plenty of blogging wouldn’t help that. A concerted OSINT effort by the enemy, or even a dupe who merely wants to put up a website tracking the strategies of American soldiers, would be a huge intelligence coup against us.

6) Finally, the enemies blogosphere efforts work largely because they are all motivated by the same cause and are naturally on the same page. Just like you don’t have to monitor the Pro-World of Warcraft sites, (or any other site devoted to a cause, idea, or movement) they too know that the Jihadis will always be portrayed as martyrs on the jihadist websites, because that is how the jihadis all see themselves. However, not every soldier sees himself as a soldier ‘in a righteous cause.’ Some see themselves as victims of an unjust system. Others feel they are just cogs. Some think they were tricked. Some think they are wasting their time. Displeasure with the chain of command is nearly universal at some point. There are probably a thousand different viewpoints out there. All of this will inform the posts that each soldier makes, and will not help the cause one bit.

I am not saying that we should not allow soldiers to blog. I believe it is an infringement upon their rights to prevent that. However, I do believe that we need a concerted effort to improve their preparedness in that area. Much like we give safety briefs on everything under the sun, blogging can be just as dangerous to the character.

This has been a disjointed post, but that is consistent with the character of the web. The IO campaign in our own borders and with our own soldiers is a vital part of the long war. We need to employ every tool we have, but merely turning soldiers loose and telling them to have at it will be as successful as dropping soldiers off on the beaches of France and telling them to make their way to Germany. We need to have a plan, and everyone needs to get training.

[wm]

Most people would agree that the media’s mission is to present “the news.” That is an interesting phrase, “the news,” one which bears further scrutiny. The news is not the status quo; it is not the way things normally are. If it were just that, then it would be the oxymoronic “old news.” The news is out of the ordinary; it is what is different. We should always expect to be surprised by what is in the news. If we are not, then what the media report really is not news. In days past, the outlets through which information flowed tended to be much more limited than at present. This meant that the media had a much easier time of finding things to report as “the news” since most of their consumers did not have many other ways (short of listening to the town gossip, eavesdropping on the party line telephone, or receiving a letter from that gadabout Aunt Hildegard in Oshkosh) to learn about significant variations in the world around them.

Nowadays, an impact of the technology explosion is to present people with a host of alternatives to find out what has changed around them. As a result, the media finds it harder and harder to find “new news,” in terms of things that are truly different or not generally known. As a result, much of what the main stream, traditional media reports these days really is not news. It is instead the same old thing, just presented from a new or different perspective. When one is able to provide the same information with a different spin to it, then one is able to pass it off as news.

What is the cash value of all of this? If one wants “fair” media coverage, then one would be well served by feeding “new” news to the media so that media staff need not find inventive ways to make “old news” look new. Sources of information not readily available to most people have the ability to feed the media’s need to provide something new and different to the public. If they fail to do so, they should not be too surprised when the media (whether that be the Wall Street Journal , Time, Tim Russert or some no-name blogger) publicizes something else that may embarrass their organizations or catch them off guard. After all, it is the "news," isn't it?

[Germ]

Where does one go for a good discussion on blogging, millenials, and military culture?
Thanks!