Losing track: ‘Old school’ policies and practices put national security at ‘high risk’

When news broke that 21-year-old Massachusetts Air National Guard airman Jack Teixeira leaked defense documents on the social network Discord, experts and concerned citizens alike began questioning who vetted this low-level service member who potentially caused grave damage to national security.

The Teixeira saga, which will likely play out for years to come across courtrooms, Capitol Hill and the Pentagon, laid bare how a troubled young man with extremist tendencies needed only a computer and reliable home internet to disseminate government secrets.

But on a more fundamental level, Teixeira’s leaks represent just the dramatic, final failure of an enfeebled national security vetting system that struggles at times to weed out extremists — even when online warning signs are available — and to track which employees have access to classified information at all.

A three-month Raw Story investigation revealed that a multi-agency government reform effort, called Trusted Workforce 2.0, is still very much still a work in progress.

It’s susceptible to vulnerabilities that come from gaps in agencies’ and contractors’ inconsistent adoption of security technologies.

Recruitment challenges are exacerbated by perceived biases against some minority populations.

Investigation practices potentially ignore publicly available warning signs — such as social media posting — for why someone should be denied a security clearance.

Key findings from Raw Story’s three-part “Losing Track” investigation include:

• Local federal agencies, local governments and especially contractors might still be using technology from a bygone era — think pens, paper and consumer-grade spreadsheets — to track their security cleared personnel
• 'Old school’ tracking practices lack security protections and are more likely to be outdated, potentially giving people access to classified information longer than they should
• The U.S. Government Accountability Office — an internal watchdog for the federal government — has classified the national security vetting process as ‘high risk’ for the past five years
• The government is creating a new IT system for the vetting process, the National Background Investigation Services (NBIS), but it won’t be fully functional for years
• The government inconsistently and manually checks social media in the clearance vetting process with each agency determining how it wants to use the information — some don’t look at all while others do it across the board or only when a concern is flagged
• The government was so backlogged with background investigations in 2017 that it could take more than two years to get a security clearance
• Still, far-right extremists might have an easier time getting a clearance than people of color with foreign ties — especially those of Middle Eastern or Chinese descent — who report feeling discriminated against in the vetting process
• The field of counterintelligence has struggled to recruit high-skilled employees to conduct background investigations — but the government is becoming more inclusive in its vetting form to attract younger talent

Have you experienced trouble while navigating the federal government’s security clearance vetting system? Do you have a tip about someone working in government with ties to extremist groups or illegal activity?

Raw Story would like to hear from you. Read more here about how to send us an anonymous tip.