Feeds

back to article 'NATO RESTRICTED': The lowest possible classification

So the hacktivist collective Anonymous, parts of which have recently tangled with News International title The Sun and may have looted an explosive trove of emails from Rupert Murdoch's media empire, also say they have a big stash of classified material stolen from NATO. As evidence they have released two documents marked "NATO …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Anonymous Coward

Tut tut tut...

BEADWINDOW there Lewis..

3
0
Pirate

Unstated grading

I used to work on classified stuff, some of the security classifications were unstated. One of the most carefully guarded documents were:

Secret (Politically Embarassing)

I could say more but I'd hate to be Kelly'd.

7
0
Coffee/keyboard

Love it!!!

I could say more but I'd hate to be Kelly'd.

made me LOL for real.... I am glad I am not the only one who believes Kelly was "silenced"...

0
0
Black Helicopters

Is The Reg safe ?

Or will I soon need to find another news channel ?

0
0
Coffee/keyboard

Correction...

Government data rules mean that RESTRICTED documents do have to be shredded.

Holding NATO RESTRICTED on unaccredited information systems is still a breach of the Official Secrets Acts, even though anything marked as such is pretty openly shareable within the military community.....

So the Sun and NI (not being in the military community) are breaking the official secrets act, and hence both people tracked to having them, reading them and their organisation's information owner can still be arrested and done from at most treason.....

And the official government classification labels are actually:

Unclassified

Protect

Restricted

Confidential

Secret

Top Secret

J

0
0
Trollface

Wow.

There's a classification level "J"? Who knew? ;-)

6
0

I...

...want to get my hands on some documents with the 'J' classification!

;)

0
0
Thumb Down

@Correction...

Having signed the Official Secrets Act myself, I am not convinced that holding documents in any form can breach it, as it is simply a reminder that you must not pass on sensitive information and that you can be prosecuted for it.

Here is the truth about the Official Secrets Act: there is no such thing as "being bounce by signing the Official Secrets Act". Everyone in the UK is bound by it (whether they have seen it or not) and can be prosecuted under it. You are asked to formally sign it simply to ensure you cannot claim ignorance, and as a reminder of your (already existing) obligations under it.

4
0
Happy

Quite right

The funny thing about Restricted documents is that the only reason they are restricted is because they have "restricted" written on them. I knew someone would would trim that part off documents so that he could recycle the remainder, but the little strips that had "NATO Restricted" written on them would have to be shredded.

0
0
Black Helicopters

"signing" the act

Where I used to work, it was mainly used by the contractor to go after employees or ex-employees. The government didn't need anything as you say; they either flattened you in a court, or you parked your car in your garage with the engine running, or fell off the balcony that you never even went near because you were afraid of heights...

0
0
Coat

Does J stand for

Juicy?

0
0
Silver badge
Paris Hilton

J?

Jennifer Lopez?

Jamaica?

Israel?

0
0
Devil

J for...

'Jesus, I can't believe I was pissed enough to leave that on the train'?

2
0

NATO

NATO is not an alliance. The HQ of NATO in Belgium is the administrative centre of the American army in Europe.

NATO is an anachronism following the fall of the Berlin wall - and we would do well instead to support European defence initiatives.

5
9
Anonymous Coward

Could you start by taking care of Afganistan?

Perhaps NATO would go away if the Europeans would take care of the stuff nearby instead of leaving North America to shoulder the burden.

3
12
Mushroom

European defence initiatives?

Would they be surrender and collaborate?

5
4
Trollface

Taking care of Afganistan

When you say this, what exactly is it you want?

Do you want the Europeans to kick out the Americans who invaded the country?

5
0
Silver badge
Facepalm

"Europeans would take care of the stuff nearby"

>Afghanistan

>Stuff nearby

The AfPak debacle is just proof that NATO is a tool for US foreign policy and finds compliant Europols that are not averse to present bodyparts for random access.

Next up:

1) Georgia in NATO

2) Ukraine in NATO

3) NATO in Africa (hold on, that's already occurring)

4) NATO to pipe all its docs to Israel (as recently demanded by two retards in US Congress)

5) NATO vs. Iran

2
2
Mushroom

Re :Richard Morris

As apposed to the American military strategy of stubbornly refusing to admit that their military is having it's ass handed to it until thousands lay dead and the public demand the troops return home.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

really?

Do you honestly need a lesson in the history, role and administration of NATO, which predates the fall of the Berlin wall?

I assume your trying to make a smart arse comment

And let me get this straight, you want a "European" army run by Europe as a whole protecting us, the same EU govenment that hasnt been able to balance its financial books for 16 years!

16 years of our money going to an unelected govenment who dont know what they are spending money on. over 700million euros has gone missing, 109million in 2009 alone, due to missmangment and fraud. Im sorry but the UK may waste money left right and centre but at elast we can say we know about it and where it is more or less, the EU is so big money can just vanish and with the auditors refusing to fully sign off the books people are just picking the money off the trees with full knowledge that nothing will be done about it.

you what them looking after your needs? then i suggest you move to Brussels

0
1
Silver badge

Drop NATO!

Support the Single European Tank!

0
0
Def
Bronze badge
Mushroom

Re: Could you start by taking care of Afganistan?

"...instead of leaving North America to shoulder the burden."

Perhaps you should have considered that before illegally invading Afghanistan in the first place.

6
2
Trollface

Title goes here...

Ummmm..... The Brits are Europeans, and I don't remember us being successfully invaded since 1066.

0
0

What?

So you're saying NATO isn't an alliance because one of its members co-locates one of its army's sub-commands with the NATO HQ? Surely that just makes sense, you know saving costs and all or would you rather every NATO command had an HQ separate from any other military entity in the country it's in?

Considering the main point of NATO for the first 50 odd years of its existence was to stop the Warsaw Pact walking into Western Europe putting the HQ of its biggest land formation at the same place as its main HQ actually makes some sense. Only some mind because ICBMs are cheap*.

Vaguely on topic, NATO RESTRICTED was once explained to me as 'Italy has it so we can safely assume so does everyone else'.

*Compared to a frontal assault obviously.

2
0

yes, but

how about regaining some sanity and supporting national defense initiatives? the eu is collapsing anyway.

of course nato is an anachronism. it's old and demented. does not even exhibit desired levels of reading comprehension when confronted with own statute.

no wonder peeps steal stuff from them...

0
0
Boffin

1066 and all that

The Dutch invaded (successfully) in the 1680's.

0
0
FAIL

Pointless title, which must contain letters and/or digits.

1689. HTH. HAND.

0
0
FAIL

This is just wrong on every point.

Did you think of this all by yourself?

0
0

Bloodless Revolution

I don't think the bloodless revolution counts - we asked the Dutch to "invade" to keep a Catholic off the throne :P

0
0

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Anonymous Coward

@AC responding to me

Nope, didnt suggest that america was better at all, and im not sure why you brought them in to it and i wasnt talking about the state of the various economys, im fully aware of how much dept our country is in.

Infact im really not sure you got what i was saying at all, they cant balance their books, their own auditors refuse to sign them off, you can check their own website if you like, no UKIP needed, we'll not get in to the whole agricultural policy and how it does shaft our country and is again condemed buy their own auditors, and you want them looking after us completely? no thanks, if our country screws up it should be our own fault, not because of some numpty in another country, them then you go on and say

"Compare this to the likes of the Falklands, and Algeria where countries like Britain and France have shown themselves to be quite competent"

We Brits won that by the skin of our teeth, it was blind luck, by definition it was a win yes but had even half the munitions that landed on our ships actually detonated (most of them didtnt) it may have been a very different story and to top it off the French where selling them the damn planes and exocets!

lol an the jokes about france being american? well yeah ok im sure they did some, but i think you will find that we have been doing it for centuries, Europe is far more complicated than you make out, you think its an ideal place? well it is definitely an ideal, the reality is far less than that.

Letting the rest of europe dictate our forign policy is a terrible idea, what we do at the moment leaves ourselves to blame, an no one else an thats the way it should stay

0
1
Black Helicopters

meh

Pretty much everything marked "RESTRICTED" is available in the public domain - if you know where to look - anyway.

1
0

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Alert

IIRC...

When I was a sparker in the Navy, the definition of restricted is "release of information would be undesirable to the host country" or something.

Still hard not to type it "R E S T R I C T E D" (You had to be there)

3
0
Anonymous Coward

no harm done

they're only doing it for the lulz, afterall....

0
0
Coat

Re: no harm done

Maybe LULZ is a classification level, too.

0
0
Stop

Nothing to see here

I understand the IT Angle but really EL Reg is giving these jokers far too much publicity already, this is like the 3rd article we have of Lulzsec "planning to release" this stuff in so many days. Unless they actually grow a pair and finally DO release anything then its not worth getting all hyped up about.

If they had anything it would have been splashed across TPB already, they had no qualms about doing so in the past so why would this be any different?

2
0
Thumb Down

UK/US/AUS/CAN/NZ EYES ONLY

Echelon is supposedly used by the US to spy on the other members of that list. Very friendly.

0
0
Silver badge
Devil

A Can of Worms?

"UK/US/AUS/CAN/NZ EYES ONLY ..... Echelon is supposedly used by the US to spy on the other members of that list. Very friendly." .... banjomike Posted Thursday 21st July 2011 15:37 GMT

And maybe even ISrael too, banjomike, for this is odd tale from the antipodes ....... http://cryptogon.com/?p=23614

0
0
Black Helicopters

And vice versa.

In the days before 9/11, if the US Military wanted intelligence intercepts from inside the US, they'd just ask one of the UK/AUS/CAN/NZ members of that list for the intercept. That made it 'intelligence sharing in cooperation with our allies" instead of "illegal intelligence-gathering activities.'

Of course, NSA already *had* the intelligence they were looking for, but still needed some plausible figleaf behind which to hide if ever it were caught out.

2
0
Thumb Up

No, it's OK...

ECHELON is a mutual snooping structure, allowing us to spy on them, spying on us, spying on them, spying on us, spying on them.............. Et cetera, repeat until bored.

0
0

There's a lower classification

"Dutch Only" - means it will be on Dutch TV within the hour.

1
1
Silver badge
Go

indeed

I bet most ex squaddies have some training batco in their attics. The most classified stuff I ever used was the black crypto boxes in clansmen. That got you a really bad spell in the glasshouse if you lost that.

3
0
Gold badge

NATO RESTRICTED

I remember a very funny time when 1 expert working on a project was not allowed to see any of the documents because he was an Australian, and so not a part of NATO. In that project, every single word I wrote was "NATO RESTRICTED" but was of no use or interest to anyone.

As for not needing to shred hard-copies, that was true where I was, although all hardcopies were securely collected and taken to the incinerator (together with type-writer ribbons!) for disposal. The more secret stuff was cross-shredded first, and then securly taken to be incinerated.

The only way to get an electronic copy of something was to physically go into the secure VAX room and copy it off. The only way you could then read that information was to go into another secure VAX room and copy it onto another VAX; if you were lucky, one of those VAXs would be on a PC network, so then all you needed was to find a PC with a diskdrive in it that was permitted to connect to the "insecure" VAX... People these days could learn a thing or two!

1
0
FAIL

Nope.

"RESTRICTED information is so unimportant that hard copies don't even have to be shredded on disposal. Add a NATO prefix and you have something completely insignificant."

Both of these sentences are wrong.

Adding NATO actually restricts the number of people in the UK who can see the document. I'll leave you to work out why.

Anon, because, well...

0
0
FAIL

Nato Classifications vs UK Classifications

In order of LEAST detrimental first...

NATO:

1.NATO RESTRICTED (NR).

2.NATO CONFIDENTIAL (NC), and

3.NATO SECRET (NS),

4.COSMIC TOP SECRET (CTS),

UK Gov:

UNCLASSIFIED, PROTECT, RESTRICTED, CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET and TOP SECRET

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information#NATO_classifications

0
0
Stop

wrong

"Protected" means "protective markings". In other words, it simpoly means that the document in question has been classified Restricted or higher.

Restricted documents do not have to be shredded but they do go into a green Burn Bag.

0
0
Facepalm

Meh

As above, RESTRICTED docs do have to be shredded, mustn't be EMailed over an insecure networks, left out on desks overnight etc.

RESTRICTED may be low down on the protective marking food chain but care is still required when dealing with the information. You'd think a DV cleared author would have known that.

0
0
Flame

Top NATO classification level:

CTSA

or

COSMIC TOP SECRET ATOMAL!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.