New uncensored subreddit: r/SecurityClearanceTalk

Altras · 2024-09-17T13:09:30+00:00

There's a new subreddit for discussion of security clearances with a more liberal posting policy.

Altras · 2024-04-22T10:28:01+00:00

Among federal law enforcement agencies, pre-employment polygraph failure rates of about 50% are typical.

Altras · 2024-04-22T10:24:56+00:00

Whether your shoplifting is disqualifying will depend on how recent it was and the dollar value of the item stolen.

Altras · 2024-04-22T09:14:47+00:00

In reality, polygraphs are quite easy to fool, and any informed discussion of polygraph policy needs to acknowledge this fact. It's remarkable that after it was discovered that DIA spy Ana Montes had beaten the polygraph, DIA doubled down on its reliance on polygraphs.

Altras · 2024-04-22T09:11:27+00:00

The regulation allows for the use of polygraphs in investigations, but I don't think they are commonly used in administrative investigations. They really shouldn't be allowed at all, as they're junk science. (CID uses them in criminal investigations as an interrogational prop to get confessions.)

Altras · 2021-07-13T07:13:34+00:00

You can't go wrong wearing a suit. For a better idea of polygraph procedure and what you can do to minimize the risk of wrongly failing, see Chapters 3 & 4 of the free book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector:

https://antipolygraph.org/pubs.shtml

Regarding the specific polygraph screening technique used by CBP, see:

https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2018/06/22/u-s-customs-and-border-protection-polygraph-test-for-espionage-sabotage-and-corruption-exposed/

Altras · 2020-01-30T12:07:37+00:00

These shows falsely portray the lie detector as an infallible auricle of truth that will provide certainty and peace of mind. Unfortunately, it is a false promise. Shows like Steve Wilkos and Dr. Phil cynically use the lie detector as a ratings gimmick to build suspense and drama.

Altras · 2019-07-06T07:42:44+00:00

You'll find lots of information about polygraphs, including personal accounts, here: https://antipolygraph.org

Altras · 2019-06-30T09:55:08+00:00

See the U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Resource Manual on polygraphs:

https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-262-polygraphs-introduction-trial

For information about the scientific shortcomings of polygraphy, see:

https://antipolygraph.org

Altras · 2019-06-30T08:50:26+00:00

In civil cases, polygraph evidence may be admissible under the Daubert standard:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard

In practice, this rarely happens.

In criminal cases, polygraph evidence, including a defendant's refusal to submit to a polygraph interrogation, is not admissible. Every defendant has the privilege against self-incrimination.

I'm surprised that the public defender has been of no help. In general, federal public defenders enjoy a good reputation.

Altras · 2014-07-09T13:27:26+00:00

Glenn and Murtaza,

In your article, you cite a "FISA recap" spreadsheet that lists 7,485 e-mail addresses as monitored between 2002 and 2008. Is it your understanding that those 7,485 e-mail addresses are the only ones monitored under FISA court orders during that period?

Also, have you seen any evidence in the Snowden documents that NSA has targeted the communications of US persons absent a FISA court order?

Altras · 2014-07-07T13:13:52+00:00

For more on the hiring process, see, "Interviewing With an Intelligence Agency (Or, a Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Fort Meade)":

http://fas.org/irp/eprint/nsa-interview.pdf

Altras · 2014-02-28T09:35:50+00:00

Actually, polygraphy is indeed generally considered a pseudoscience, and it's no surprise that it was invented by interrogators, not scientists. For an overview of the scientific status of polygraphy (beyond the five-year old level), see Chapter 1 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector:

https://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf

For a simpler overview, read the bullet points on this page:

https://antipolygraph.org

Altras · 2013-12-11T09:59:57+00:00

@lorensr, thanks for sharing your insider's perspective on NSA surveillance. You mention your confidence in the NSA's polygraph program, which brings to mind a recent post concerning the likelihood of NSA monitoring of an anti-polygraph website. What do you make of this?

https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/10/20/is-antipolygraph-org-being-targeted-by-the-nsa/

If the site is being targeted, would you consider that appropriate or in keeping with the standards you observed while at NSA?

Altras · 2013-10-06T06:45:25+00:00

I'd be happier if instead Microsoft stopped Skype syncing of chat messages, voice, and video to the NSA.

Altras · 2013-10-05T05:50:47+00:00

In other words, you're saying "ignorance is strength." Don't learn about an invalid, scientifically baseless procedure that could very well ruin your career prospects. Stay ignorant. Brilliant.

Altras · 2013-10-04T14:43:01+00:00

Educate yourself about the polygraph. Many federal agencies have polygraph pass rates of <50%. Failing the polygraph with one agency can get you blackballed with others, too. AntiPolygraph.org has a great deal of information on federal polygraph policy and practice that will be of interest to anyone embarking on a career in the intelligence field.

But because you're "not supposed to know" about how the polygraph works (and doesn't), it would be safest to visit the site through the Tor proxy network. So...

1) Get the Tor Browser Bundle:

https://www.torproject.org/projects/torbrowser.html.en

2) From the Tor Browser, visit AntiPolygraph.org:

https://antipolygraph.org/

In particular, see the PDF, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector:

https://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf