BREAKING: Obama Failed to Do Background Checks on HUNDREDS of Cyber-Contractors

Despite the mainstream media’s attempt to portray Barack Obama as infallible, the former President’s administration was marred with errors and oversights, many of which directly put our country in peril.
Obama was more interested in filling high-level positions with “diversity” than he was in running the country correctly, and unqualified people were frequently elevated to positions of unbelievable power.
Now, it’s coming to light that Obama’s EPA used unvetted cyber contractors for years, allowing unknown individuals to have access to cyber information without proper background checks.
The Democrats screaming about “Russian collusion” should turn their wrath towards their lord-and-savior, Barack Obama, if they really care about “outside influences” in U.S. politics, because he opened the gates for them to operate freely.
If liberals want to believe that Russia played a role in the outcome of the election, they can thank Obama, because his administration’s sloppy security procedures would be directly responsible.
From Fox News
Hundreds of contractors holding important information security jobs at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have for years been working as high-level operators of its computer systems without the appropriate security background checks — a situation the agency is still scrambling to correct.
During all that time, the agency apparently did not even have a complete list of all the “high-risk” positions where detailed background investigations of outside contractors were required.
In other instances, the agency had assigned lower levels of background scrutiny to the positions than the importance of the positions — and their information access — deserved, according to preliminary investigations carried out by the EPA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG).
Moreover, despite much-touted efforts to tighten up cybersecurity by the Obama administration, the situation was still bad when Obama left office. An internal EPA tally in February 2017 showed that nearly 70 percent of 484 contractors carrying a special, embedded-chip card allowing “elevated access” to EPA computer systems for their work still had not gotten their higher-level background checks.
For their part, the EPA’s auditors noted that in their initial small sampling, five of nine contractor personnel were given sensitive access to EPA computer systems without strict background checks, even though they had worked for the EPA “for over five years.”
The gaping holes in EPA’s information security defenses were severe enough that the agency’s OIG investigators, who began an audit of the contractor background checks last March, stopped work and issued a rare “management alert” to the Trump administration’s EPA officials about the situation, which was released to the public at the end of September.
(EPA officials were, in fact, briefed about the situation in late August.)
“Contractor personnel with potentially questionable backgrounds are accessing sensitive agency data and could cause harm,” the alert concluded.  “These initial investigations and timely reviews serve as a cornerstone for the EPA to verify whether contractor personnel are trustworthy.”
Such alerts “say that this is something the agency should respond to right away,” says Jennifer Kaplan, the agency’s deputy assistant inspector general for congressional and public affairs, told Fox News.
The same point was underlined in the alert itself, which noted that “many of these underlying issues could have been uncovered had EPA management conducted oversight and a timely review of these processes.”
“This is definitely disturbing,” observes Theresa Payton, one of the country’s leading cybersecurity experts and the first female chief information officer at the White House during the Bush administration. “If you are giving network access to someone, it’s a no-brainer to give them a thorough background check.”
“There has never been more reason to target us than now, on the part of North Korea, China and Russia. And there has never been more delicate and fragile trust in our government than right now.”
The lack of background investigations and consequent security risks were known — at least in large detail — to top EPA officials of the Obama administration as far back as August, 2015. That was two months after the White House Office of Personnel Management announced that it had been hit by the biggest hack of federal government personal information in history, eventually affecting an estimated 21.5 million federal employees, with much of the information extracted from outside contractors.
The August 2015 milestone marked the end of the Obama administration’s much-touted “30-Day Cybersecurity Sprint,” an effort to get a grip on cybersecurity lapses across the federal government in the wake of the massive information threat.
The “sprint” supposedly included a drastic upgrade to the safeguards around all such “privileged” or high-access users through the use of embedded-chip user ID cards that supposedly guaranteed they had appropriate clearances for their degree of access to EPA networks
Yet at EPA, at least the vaunted new levels of security alert were apparently something of a mirage, at least where outside contractors were concerned.
By the end of 2016, by EPA’s own estimate, half of the agency’s “privileged users” of sensitive computer systems still did not have the appropriate background investigations needed for the ID cards they were using.  The strict-scrutiny background checks had simply been “temporarily” waived.
Two months later, when EPA learned that nearly 70 percent of contractors still were without appropriate background checks, the situation clearly was not much better.
According to EPA, it is doing just that. An EPA spokesperson told Fox News that “93 percent” of all current privileged access card holders have gotten “the appropriate level of investigation.”
Since, according to the spokesperson, EPA now has 628 privileged card-holders, that means 44 people still haven’t gotten the appropriate background check.
Share on Google Plus

0 comentarios:

Publicar un comentario