Talk:Joint Functional Component Command – Network Warfare
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
- Little is known about the Joint Functional Component Command for Network Warfare, or JFCCNW, whose existence was only revealed to the public in 2005. One of its goals is defending sensitive networks like that of the Department of Defense, which hackers attempted to enter nearly 75,000 times in 2004 [1] (http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,67223,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1). Another mission is
The first sentence above does not say whether this is
- A group of graduate students in the computer science department at MIT, or
- A new religious cult, or
- A branch of Microsoft that contracts with the Defense Department, or
- A computer program now being marketed, intended to prevent identity theft, or
- A terrorist organization closely allied with al Qaeda, or
- An anarchist movement, or
- An agency of the federal government, or .....
etc. The second sentence causes one to think it's probably an agency of the federal goverment. I don't like saying "probably" when I've already finished two sentences of the article. If this is an agency of the federal government, the first sentence should say so right away. Michael Hardy 22:42, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
above top secret?
[edit]It should be noted that Executive Order 12958, the currently active overarching guidance on national security and classification issues, does not provide for levels of classification "above" Top Secret.
It does establish the existence of Special Access Programs (SAP) that heavily restrict access based on need-to-know. However, these SAPs must be established at an existing level of classification: Confidential, Secret, Top Secret. [1]
There are also "code word" programs. Again, this is a method of restricting access based on need-to-know, not a level of classification.
The author may be referring to Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) clearance. This requires additional investigative steps before the subject can be cleared (usually counter-intelligence or full-lifestyle polygraph) and is possessed by a relatively small percentage of the DOD population. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.43.190.8 (talk • contribs) 11:26, September 18, 2006 (EST).
- I was going to say the same thing, but since the comment has stood unchallenged for a few months, given no objection I will alter the offending text within a few days. A reference for where this information was from would be helpful to know whether the author meant to reference TS/SCI or was just mistaken about the classification system. --Rodzilla 07:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Joint Functional Component Command – Network Warfare. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090606065401/http://www.space.com/spacenews/archive07/spotlight_0122.html to http://www.space.com/spacenews/archive07/spotlight_0122.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:18, 26 April 2017 (UTC)