'SECURITY' - is it really a dirty word?
 

Do we put too much information out, here on PPrune?
Both technical and personal.
Is 'It's available on the internet' an easy cop-out?
Aircraft types, location and broad brush mission statements are frequently mentioned, and whilst some are obviously highly visible in the media, not everything needs/should be public surely? (Don't call me Shirley.....)
When someone mentions security in passing, (or anywhere else..), are we perhaps too quick to shout them down?

Now 'crevice', that's a really filthy word.

sssshh, you never know who's who.:cool:

'Security' can cover many angles. Perhaps, an air force would like to hide their true limitations, or perhaps in another situation, might wish to hide latest advances.

We in the UK have a wholey different and more cunning tack: By letting any swinging d#^k have accesss to endless lists of personal details, from all forms of life, we swamp the 'hun', making it impossible to sift good data from bad.

Just to be doubley sure that not a squeak of sercrecy is disturbed, we play the same trick on our own people with JPA or any 'Open' Gov website, which has pretty much replaced all the post offices. At least for those with internet.

So, rest assured, your secret's safe with us!

Right, I'm off to look at new cars... now where's that laptop, and mustn't forget the 450Gb portable, un-emcrypted herd drive thingy. Someone partially bent the USB plug, so unless you know how to get it in, you've no chance! (Ooh Err)

Bahhhhhhhhrrrrrrrrrrrr

Advo (Deny Everything........)

Rocket Science...

Hmmmm....

lets see...

Janes defence weekly....

Airband scanners....

Uk Military markings books....

main roads next to Airbases etc etc etc....

not to mention Freedom of Info Act...

damn, security is Rocket Science....


I never forget a TacEval at a secret Oxon airbase (with aircraft of the non rotary type), the RAF's finest from Mudloe Ranor (name changed to protect the guilty).. they walked around a hangar, clipboards n tape measures in hand...

Why ??

Measuring up for carpets..!!

I think that there is such a mish-mash of fact and bulls**t on this forum that we probably confuse the hell out of anybody trying to get information we don't want them them to have!

I recently got a right obnoxious bashing about being a wannabee moderator when I questioned a post. One of the nice references was Hitler, the rest were worse. All I asked was for names to be removed. I stand by my posts on that thread. It is not always about national security, some people are just 'bonkers' and they may not have seen Janes/have scanners/go to bases etc etc. I had a nutter start sending me letters and threatening me, when my name appeared in the Liverpool Echo in 2004. Even if information is available publicly, make them work to find it, rather than serve it up on a plate on Pprune!! Remember just how many times lazy journos quote directly from Pprune without checking facts. Some stories are still entertaining without minute detail being quoted.

Blanket bans are counter-productive. Try to keep everything secret, and you just stimulate curiosity and encourage the bloody-minded to dig deeper.

Moreover, it ought to be a guiding principal that (except where it is demonstrably and materially damaging to do otherwise) the taxpayer does have some right to know how his/her money is being spent, and indeed what is being done in his or her name. Go too far from this and it's counter productive as above.

Nothing should EVER be protected on security grounds when all that is being protected is political embarrassment or the reputation of a senior officer who has acted unwisely or improperly.

However, that does not mean that there should be carte blanche for journos, nor even that anything should be fair game unless it can be proven to be damaging.

There is a sensible, commonsense, middle ground, and there are some general rules which you'd find most journos willing to stick to.

No parametrics (especially not weapons and sensor performance).
No tactics. (Doctrine is fair game, though).
No names of people serving in operational theatres.
No names of current overseas op locations except where previously released and confirmed by MoD.
No arrival/departure dates until after the event, and after released and confirmed by MoD.

Anything else should be on a case-by-case basis, guided by commonsense, and with caution and conservatism the guiding principals.

'ere, you got any info on Sea Eagles mister? :p

Tim,

Big, heavy, sometimes green ....

Live(d) in boxes and seldom saw the light of day.






Until they were all scrapped :(

All open source/unrestricted I beleive:

Sea Eagle Info

Talking of Securityb and Journo's...

i just saw a report HRH Wills is going to join RN SAR ops....

funny me was thinking he was joining the yellow/grey version of the Sea King...

not the grey/orange one with a playing card on it...

No, but creavasse is.

The Beeb reports that the Sea Eagle is to be reintroduced. Does this mean that FASGW is dead?

("Now leak is a positively disgusting word...")

:E

I/C

s'ok, 'twas a tongue-in-cheek comment for my esteemed colleague... don't ask!:p

A recent email was sent around detailing that the word "S€CR€T" is no longer allowed to be used in the Subject line - apart from the same email which used S€cr€t in the subject line!!!

As It's Xmas, A Sgt sent out an email to 45 people about a "S€cr€t Santa" do for Xmas.
Cue almost 2000 emails to everybody on the distribution list quaratining the email - Problem is, 2000 internally generated quarantine emails is regarded by the server (which itself generated the 2000 emails) as a DDOS attack and shuts down!!!!

From now on all S€cr€t Santa's should be known as "Covert Claus".

Thou shalt not say Jehovah. :uhoh:

Jehovah, Jehovah, Jehovah.

Oh and ISTR it is spelt Iehovah.......Could be wrong though, it has been known.

The Name of Adonai
 

YHWH

Vowels to be inserted by those in possession of the secret knowledge only.

unclenelli,

All would have been OK if the Sgt had used the following subject line iaw IT regs: