Secrecy of NSA Affiliation

At 5:55 PM 1/25/96, Rich Salz wrote:

>Up until recently (18-30 months ago) NSA employees were only allowed
>to identify themselves as employees of DoD.  It was common knowledge,
>that unspecific references to Fort Meade meant NSA; and if you saw
>a P.O. from Procurement Office, Fort Meade, it meant the NSA was buying
>it.

When I attended Crypto '88, nearly 8 years ago, at least several of the NSA
attendees had "National Security Agency" on their name badges. It may be
that run-of-the-mill employees still maintain the fiction  for public
consumption that they are DOD employees, but such was not the case in 1988
at "Crypto."

(Recall the "NSA Employees Manual" which 2600 liberated, and which Grady
Ward then redistributed. It had some tips, as I recall, on what employees
should tell the curious.)

When I visited the D.C. area in early '91 or '92 (I forget which year it
was), I stopped by Fort Meade to see the place. The sign out front
prominently said "National Security Agency," complete with the NSA seal (an
eagle lifting a hacker up in its talons).

Also, much other evidence points to the NSA having "gone public" much
farther back in time than 18-30 months ago. Former DIRNSAs on the
MacNeil-Lehrer Newshour were always introduced as former directors of the
NSA. As early as the mid-80s, as I recollect. I think Bamford's book pretty
much outed the name, though it was widely known before that, of course.

(I attended my freshman year of high school in Langley, VA. Through the
woods on one side of the school was CIA headquarters. At that time, 1967,
it was still only labelled as something like "Department of Transportation
Road Testing Facility." Everyone knew what it really was, of course. Rick
Smith, on this list, was a classmate of mine and can attest to this. The
CIA "went public" in the early 70s, the NSA in the early 80s, the NRO in
the early 90s...I sense a pattern. This means the ultra-secret ERO
(Extraterrestrial Research Organization) will be outed in the opening years
of the next decade.)

--Tim May


Boycott espionage-enabled software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1  | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Timothy C. May said:
> 
> At 5:55 PM 1/25/96, Rich Salz wrote:
> 
> >Up until recently (18-30 months ago) NSA employees were only allowed
> >to identify themselves as employees of DoD.  It was common knowledge,
> >that unspecific references to Fort Meade meant NSA; and if you saw
> >a P.O. from Procurement Office, Fort Meade, it meant the NSA was buying
> >it.
> 
> When I attended Crypto '88, nearly 8 years ago, at least several of the NSA
> attendees had "National Security Agency" on their name badges. It may be
> that run-of-the-mill employees still maintain the fiction  for public
> consumption that they are DOD employees, but such was not the case in 1988
> at "Crypto."

At the RSA conference last week, there were approximately 10 people from
the NSA. Only 2 of those were registered as DOD, the rest were NSA. I
mentioned this at lunch to a guy from the NSA, and he said that only
oldtimers do the DOD identification anymore.


-- 
Kevin L. Prigge         |"Have you ever gotten tired of hearing those 
UofM Central Computing  | ridiculous AT&T commercials claiming credit 
email: klp@tc.umn.edu   | for things that don't even exist yet? 
010010011101011001100010| You will." -Emmanuel Goldstein

Kevin L Prigge writes:
>Timothy C. May said:
>> When I attended Crypto '88, nearly 8 years ago, at least several of the NSA
>> attendees had "National Security Agency" on their name badges. It may be
>> that run-of-the-mill employees still maintain the fiction  for public
>> consumption that they are DOD employees, but such was not the case in 1988
>> at "Crypto."

This sounds about right.  When I was an NSA employee ('83), our
introductory briefing included the suggestion (I don't recall it being
phrased as a command command) that we identify ourselves as DoD.  It
was suggested that this might lessen our visibility as espionage
targets.

At the time, the brass would likely have been identified as NSA, as
were the lesser brass in the National Computer Security Center, but
regular employees weren't.

>At the RSA conference last week, there were approximately 10 people from
>the NSA. Only 2 of those were registered as DOD, the rest were NSA. I
>mentioned this at lunch to a guy from the NSA, and he said that only
>oldtimers do the DOD identification anymore.

Yikes.  Sometimes age creeps up on you when you aren't looking.  I
guess I'd be an "oldtimer" if I were still working there?  An
"oldtimer" at thirty-three... hmm.

> This sounds about right.  When I was an NSA employee ('83), our
> introductory briefing included the suggestion (I don't recall it being
> phrased as a command command) that we identify ourselves as DoD.  It
> was suggested that this might lessen our visibility as espionage
> targets.

You can read the NSA Employees Manual at http://nyx10.cs.du.edu:8001/~eagle
-- 
According to John Perry Barlow:                       *What is EFF?* 
"Jeff Davis is a truly gifted trouble-maker." *email <info@eff.org>*
*** O U T L A W S  On The  E L E C T R O N I C  F R O N T I E R ****
US Out Of Cyberspace!!! Join EFF Today! *email <membership@eff.org>*

>Up until recently (18-30 months ago) NSA employees were only allowed
>to identify themselves as employees of DoD.  It was common knowledge,
>that unspecific references to Fort Meade meant NSA; and if you saw
>a P.O. from Procurement Office, Fort Meade, it meant the NSA was buying
>it.

Nothing has really changed. During orientation, you are told to keep your
NSA affiliation low key. But you are not ordered to. This was part of the
No Such Agency stuff, trying not to draw attention to yourself or the
Agency, and to avoid questions from the curious. Perhaps the most important
reason for keeping it low key though, was to preserve your career
options. But for disciplines such as crypto, the choices are quite limited
so broadcasting you are NSA does not matter much.