Working Together: Governments, Businesses, Non-Profits...

Information Sharing

The sharing of timely information important to critical infrastructure by federal agencies is a fallacy. We're told time and again that various security clearances are needed before information can be shared. As an InfraGard member, I'm asked to report suspicious or unusual activity; a one-way street. My suggestion is simple. Make obtaining various security clearances less onerous to obtain and direct those agencies that collect information regarding critical infrastructure responsible for engaging in two-way communication that is beneficial to both. Information is power only when it's shared.

Tags

Submitted by

Stage: Active

Feedback Score

47 votes
Idea#16

Idea Details

Vote Activity (latest 20 votes)

  1. Upvoted
  2. Upvoted
  3. Upvoted
  4. Upvoted
  5. Upvoted
  6. Upvoted
  7. Upvoted
  8. Upvoted
  9. Upvoted
  10. Upvoted
  11. Upvoted
  12. Upvoted
  13. Upvoted
  14. Upvoted
  15. Upvoted
  16. Upvoted
  17. Upvoted
  18. Upvoted
  19. Upvoted
  20. Upvoted
(latest 20 votes)

Similar Ideas [ 4 ]

Comments

  1. Comment
    the.force5

    The DHS and the Embassies all around the World and/ or Consulates they should provide to person getting visas the links for police records of the country they need to get the police certificate., Sometimes a person before getting visa travel and stay for 4 to 8 months in another country and return to country where applied for the visa, and they ask them the police certificate from they country that person went visiting as a tourist. The Consulates and the DHS should post the links of the International Police of every country the USA have Embassies and/or Consulates. Remember that every country have the Interpol And the immigration Police working together.

    It is pitiful that a Consulate different from the USA has to give the addresses and/or links so the person can get the police certificate.

  2. Comment
    jds

    I'm not really sure what the other comment is trying to say but I do agree with you that the process for any type of Security clearance is extremely long. Way longer than it necessarily has to be. I recently pulled the National Security questionnaire and it wants the last ten years of information plus all of my siblings, etc. The process takes greater than one year at this point in time to vet anyone with a minimum security clearance. Way to long. We aren't getting any younger.

  3. Comment
    Peter Grandgeorge

    John's comments are echo my experience. A two-way street is needed. Communication involves a sender and receiver and active listening involves two-way feedback. "Black hole" describes the system now.

    I'd also add that reasonable vetting should be done on requests to private industry. My organization squandered a dozen hours of staff time trying to track down a certain chemical reportedly of concern. Three weeks later, we were informed that it was a wild goose chase and no reasonable threat existed. I had to report the same information three ways to three different federal reporting chains. Frustrating.

  4. Comment
    steven.longmire

    Hi John,

    without question, the sharing of information is critical. In the last 13 years that I have been involved from a technology point of view in assisting first responders and multiple 3 letter agencies in assessing critical infrastructure and risk, you are absolutely right for the most part, some of the requirements for security clearances for the types of information having to do with the protection of certain critical infrastructures, could benefit by a reduction of the vetting process, and in my opinion, even letting vetted volunteers not only participate in a lower level of sharing of the results of those assessments, but also contribute to the assessment process providing information about the critical infrastructure, the area, from the point of view of a local. As you know, most assessments of critical infrastructure if they are drill down as they should be, are usually conducted from some one from outside the area, such as a contractor that has expertise in the assessment of critical infrastructures. I have some other friends that are part of InfraGuard, and a lot of great things happen not only from that organization but other organizations and NGOs, but there is a major separation due to security clearances on the communications with those individuals and organizations. You mention two-way communication, you are 100% right John, it is not only critical, beneficial, but it is absolutely necessary, and I hope the future will provide establishing some new security vetting process to establish that two-way communication.

    Thanks John, great idea!

    Steven Longmire

  5. Comment
    bcandmax2001

    Greetings from the Third World

    My name is Paul Keith Reyes and I would like to mention that this kind of information sharing sounds good but must be critically looked at. Corruption is to easy to fall into.ç

    Sincerely

    PK Reyes

    Pablo´s laborer

    Go Raiders!!

Add your comment