Look at the submissions from that domain. A large amount are marked as [dead]. I would assume the filter is by domain name. I've seen similar activity with other domain names.
I'm not familiar with this site, so I can't guess as to why.
I'm not familiar with this site, so I can't guess as to why.
But their audience can be problematic. They tend to attract the crowd that screams "false flag" after every banal news event, so it's not surprising it'd be default spam suspect here, irrespective of the site itself.
Also, I doubt this is a hnews concern, but for folks currently holding clearances just reading that story could put them in hot water.
Can you elaborate on your last point - why?
Note: I do not hold a clearance, but I've had to sign affidavits for others, so I know a bit about how it works.
Basically, the rules put the burden on the holder of a clearance to not expose themselves to information they shouldn't. If and when it does happen, you need to report it. The way the system works is of course horridly bureaucratic, but on the whole if you report things with honesty early it'll be handled without being a big deal.
In any case, this means when you participate in forums/venues where open source intel and clearance holders are likely to interact, you'll see people giving that sort of warning as a courtesy, so that the clearance holders can just dodge the issue. It's sort of like putting a content warning in one of your early slides if you're going to discuss something that could be highly distressing to some people.
Probably the most glaring example of this sort of content is the snowden archive. As a clearance holder you would not want to get noticed holding onto some of the documents that are in there, no matter their veracity.
Just because something is printed in a newspaper doesn’t mean that the thing in question is unclassified. And if you have classified material in your possession and you don’t treat it properly (like locking it up in an appropriate safe when it’s going to be out of your hands, even for just a few minutes), then that can get you into some really serious trouble.
If the publication in question contains a classified code word used in code word context and you don’t treat it appropriately, well then you’re probably done for.
Feel free to try to guess which GURPS book from Steve Jackson Games that would be, but you would almost certainly be wrong.
I love this comment so much :P
How would that work for folks holding clearances that, following one of several paths other than directly reading the article discussion (like reading some random user's comments page), get exposed to significant bits of the article?
Come to think of it, how safe in general for folks with clearances is browsing HN, with its many discussions of military tech, intelligence topics, spycraft and security breaches news?
Good luck figuring out who you're supposed to report to about that thing you aren't supposed to know about though.
Thus is the Catch 22 of Quality Controlling. Information classification systems.
I suppose trusting an outside org to have properly handled a NatSec breach would not be a part of NatSec procedures