Keep in mind, although he's classed as an 'ethical' hacker, many whitehats come from blackhat backgrounds, and turned whitehat because of fear of getting caught up in draconian CFAA[0] trials. Every hacker in their youth done some stupid stuff that could haunt them later. If you didn't do stupid stuff in your youth, you never really grew or learned from it.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act
That doesn't happen without having any skeletons in your closet identified and investigated.
Source: currently do DARPA-funded research. No PM has ever mentioned having a clearance to me, and the work itself is entirely uncleared.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_but_unclassified
https://news.clearancejobs.com/2020/09/01/what-is-a-public-t...
(I’m not trying to be stubborn! If he really did hold a clearance as a DARPA PM, then I’m wrong in his case.)
Although that wording about "Clearance level" does seem to suggest more than just the baseline government employee background check.
In general, it doesn't. For some project areas it sometimes does. It really depends.
Most programs themselves are unclass, and there are lots of collaborations in fundamental research where it's completely open, not even controlled unclass (CUI). That doesn't imply anything about the PM's clearance status. Not sure why a PM would go out of their way to talk about clearance status unless they were specifically planning for classified discussions. Your point about having a clearance not being some huge deal is certainly true though.
*Some support service people like janitorial may not be - I don't know, but then those people are escorted by people who are.
(I don’t know why ‘throwawaylol_ is flagged; I vouched for their comment.)
† None of it involved vulnerability research; this was back in my anti-DDOS days.
Yup. They would have gone in with a proctoscope, and would not have tossed him an ID card, unless he could completely convince them that he's good for it.
If they are looking for dirt, they won't get it. I assume they are intelligent people, and know that, so maybe they are actually doing what has been suggested; looking for as much accurate information as possible -either way.
NPD is a multibillion-dollar company, because they sell accurate information; not information that people want to hear (how they get that information, well, that's another matter).
This is a mild overstatement. DARPA doesn't necessarily require clearances for PMs; even if a particular project does, it's not necessarily one that requires the "full-scope" process (meaning polygraph and the rest of the works).
I wound't be surprised if Mudge had to fill out an SF-86, but that's not that invasive as far as background investigations go. It's nearly identical to the process used for Global Entry.
It's courageous for him to speak the truth (at least his observations) when they were unwilling to and actively try to undermine it.
Astronauts undergo detailed psyche exams, personality evaluations, and usually have some level of security clearance. And yet..
How is that relevant to whether someone has a skeleton in the closet when they are getting a background check?
So, he's... just like most people? Do you have any specific incident(s) to point to, re: Mudge, or is this just speculation that can be applied to nearly everyone?
“Ethical” hacker is also a nonsense term. Ethics means the study of moral philosophy, it is not a synonym for “good” and to use it as such belies a superficial understanding of both morality and hacking.
I think it's generally accepted that these days it is a synonym for, if not "good" per se, at least "morally acceptable".