StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Gizmodo

Gizmodo wrote: The FBI Is Struggling to Hire Hackers Who Don't Smoke Weed

The FBI has a problem. The agency needs to hire hackers to build out its cyber crime division, but it also will not hire anyone who's smoked weed in the past three years. And guess what? A lot of hackers like to smoke weed.

It's a real conundrum. However, it's a conundrum the FBI is working through. On Monday—the same day the agency made headlines by issuing wanted posters for Chinese Army hackers—FBI director James Comey told an audience at the White Collar Crime Institute about this little pot problem. "I have to hire a great work force to compete with those cyber criminals, and some of those kids want to smoke weed on the way to the interview," Comey said. Exactly how to do that is the hard part. Comey added that the agency is "grappling with the question right now."

So does this mean the FBI is looking to hire stoners? No, probably not. It does look like our friends in federal law enforcement are warming up to the idea of hiring people that like to take part in a fun activity that's legal in two states and practically legal in many more, though. In fact, Comey even told a member of the audience that his friend "should go ahead and apply," even if he's worried about the policy. And so can you. [WSJ]

This might sound like a funny little story but this is in fact a serious issue for most of the cyber warfare and cyber crimes portions of the government. When I saw this story I messaged a friend sits in for interviews for a certain agency. He confirmed that in the last two years they have been averaging around 1 in 10 people are surprised to hear that drug tests might be involved in government work. To quote him directly "He was a bright kid but not shit he told us he knew he could not smoke at work but wanted to know if smoking while out getting lunch would be fine. It was his third question after hours and salary negations"

Looks like I picked the wrong week to get my medical marijuana license.
Also, do I get free donuts and twinkies?

There's a similar "problem" in my industry. The major companies keep making very concerned noises about testing for weed, especially since we legalized here, but they secretly know that if they got rid of all the potheads, the only cab drivers left would be the tweakers, and who the fuck really wants that?

When I was in my twenties I worked for a company that made the rear doors for tractor-trailers. (It was a labour job, which I did for a while, then ended up running the office.) If an employee could last a week he usually hung around for a few months or years, and after a while there were two or three of them who took to having a "smoke break" at lunch time most days. The owner (who was by no means unfamiliar with the stuff) gently, and later firmly, suggested that this behaviour must not continue, since it was too dangerous to have people working with table saws and pinch-rollers and other dangerous equipment. I recall that one guy quit on the spot.

Not exactly high up on the skill level, but that's my experience with weed at the workplace.

Raw Shark wrote:There's a similar "problem" in my industry. The major companies keep making very concerned noises about testing for weed, especially since we legalized here, but they secretly know that if they got rid of all the potheads, the only cab drivers left would be the tweakers, and who the fuck really wants that?

Also, couldn't you theoretically get a false positive from all the passengers who smoke?

Borgholio wrote:

Raw Shark wrote:There's a similar "problem" in my industry. The major companies keep making very concerned noises about testing for weed, especially since we legalized here, but they secretly know that if they got rid of all the potheads, the only cab drivers left would be the tweakers, and who the fuck really wants that?

Also, couldn't you theoretically get a false positive from all the passengers who smoke?

Theoretically, yes. In practice, however, the whole Smoking-Legally-Off-Duty-Without-DUI / THC-In-Your-Bloodstream-While-Employed issue hasn't really been formally tested yet in this very-employer-friendly state, and IMHO it is probably going to take at least one very rich local kid with the equivalent of F. Lee Bailey for his lawyer taking it all the way to the State Supreme Court and winning to change that, and until that happens the "Second-hand Smoke" defense won't have legs, either.

Raw Shark wrote:

Borgholio wrote:

Raw Shark wrote:There's a similar "problem" in my industry. The major companies keep making very concerned noises about testing for weed, especially since we legalized here, but they secretly know that if they got rid of all the potheads, the only cab drivers left would be the tweakers, and who the fuck really wants that?

Also, couldn't you theoretically get a false positive from all the passengers who smoke?

Theoretically, yes. In practice, however, the whole Smoking-Legally-Off-Duty-Without-DUI / THC-In-Your-Bloodstream-While-Employed issue hasn't really been formally tested yet in this very-employer-friendly state, and IMHO it is probably going to take at least one very rich local kid with the equivalent of F. Lee Bailey for his lawyer taking it all the way to the State Supreme Court and winning to change that, and until that happens the "Second-hand Smoke" defense won't have legs, either.

If your company's anal retentive enough you can definitely get fired for false positives from second-hand smoke. http://www.kboi2.com/news/local/Cheryl- ... 90021.html

General Zod wrote:If your company's anal retentive enough you can definitely get fired for false positives from second-hand smoke. http://www.kboi2.com/news/local/Cheryl- ... 90021.html

This is definitely an issue for anybody who might be exposed to pot smoke and who works for a company that tends to not-not be a total dick about it. I think that it is going to require a legal challenge with significant money behind it to really broadly change anything on the official level with regard to employment laws, as I claimed above. The first genuinely-rich, "can't-get-rid-of-it" kid who gets fired or inconvenienced over this will probably change more than Amendment 64 in practical terms, IMHO.

From the amount of begging the FBI did in my network security/ethical hacking course, they're probably having a hard time hiring non-stoners for the same reason they're having a hard time hiring the rest of the cybersecurity guys: they don't have any fucking money. When a rep for FBI cyber-crime is standing up in front of your class more or less pleading with people to intern with the FBI, and even then he says that they can't offer anywhere near what the private sector can...

Yeah, cyber-security and penetration testing are very, very sought-after fields. Is it any wonder the only people who answer the FBI's want ads are the stoners?

Part of me wonders how many of these hemphead hackers want to work for the FBI just so they can say they're a stoner working for the FBI. "Dude, you know what'd be funny? *toooooooke coughcoughcough* If, like, I worked for the FBI, man... Whoa..."

White Haven wrote:From the amount of begging the FBI did in my network security/ethical hacking course, they're probably having a hard time hiring non-stoners for the same reason they're having a hard time hiring the rest of the cybersecurity guys: they don't have any fucking money. When a rep for FBI cyber-crime is standing up in front of your class more or less pleading with people to intern with the FBI, and even then he says that they can't offer anywhere near what the private sector can...

Yeah, cyber-security and penetration testing are very, very sought-after fields. Is it any wonder the only people who answer the FBI's want ads are the stoners?

Because God forbid anyone take any less money to do something for the common good right?

Block wrote: Because God forbid anyone take any less money to do something for the common good right?

To which the highly payed private guys say...
"You think hackers get good by attacking goverment systems? If a hacker wants to be sure his game is good or his virus will work he starts someplace with the best security on the planet. Wall Street"

It's kind of like the same pitch Xe or whatever Blackwater is these days. Computer Security is computer security and working in the private secter nets you more hackers than goverment work even if one is just for money and trade secrets rather than intelligence and national secrets.

Block wrote:

White Haven wrote:From the amount of begging the FBI did in my network security/ethical hacking course, they're probably having a hard time hiring non-stoners for the same reason they're having a hard time hiring the rest of the cybersecurity guys: they don't have any fucking money. When a rep for FBI cyber-crime is standing up in front of your class more or less pleading with people to intern with the FBI, and even then he says that they can't offer anywhere near what the private sector can...

Yeah, cyber-security and penetration testing are very, very sought-after fields. Is it any wonder the only people who answer the FBI's want ads are the stoners?

Because God forbid anyone take any less money to do something for the common good right?

Having a mortgage, dependents, medical bills and college debt might be enough to outweigh someone's desire to serve the common good.

General Zod wrote:Having a mortgage, dependents, medical bills and college debt might be enough to outweigh someone's desire to serve the common good.

Also, the question remains how working for the FBI is serving the "common good".

After all, FBI only operates (or should) within the US. So any hackers they employ will attack systems within the US borders. Make of that what you will...

I thought FBI "hackers" were employed in a forensic capacity, investigating computer crimes. Perhaps you have confused the Federal Bureau of Investigation with the CIA or military cyber capabilities.

No. Cyber crime division is usually different from the guys decrypting confiscated hard drives. They seek network security experts - those guys are infiltrators. As in "hackers"...

I see some clarification is in order. This was an FBI agent working in their cyber crime division who was giving a presentation to a group of college students in an ethical hacking course. They are absolutely, definitively looking for people who understand both sides of computer security, not just IT forensics people. And I'll admit, I was really tempted, more so because this was pre-Snowden. It was, however, right smack in the middle of the storm over Aaron Swartz, and specifically the Department of Justice being used as a club beat him senseless, so I had serious ethical concerns about doing penetration-testing work for the FBI.

Now, in many other cases, people are simply motivated by personal rewards. In cases like that, your most 'professional,' most driven, and often most skilled people are going to right to the top of the private sector, because that's where the money is. That neatly skims off most of your real high-fliers. What's left are the mediocre types, who the FBI does not want, and the skilled-but-unprofessional types for whom white-collar private sector doesn't appeal for social and environmental reasons. Now, obvious this is a generalization and there are many exceptions, but the FBI is ultimately going to have to compromise either their internal standards or their pay scale if they want the really skilled hackers to sign on the dotted line.

And shove an enema in Justice, but that's probably too much to ask.

General Zod wrote:

Block wrote:

White Haven wrote:From the amount of begging the FBI did in my network security/ethical hacking course, they're probably having a hard time hiring non-stoners for the same reason they're having a hard time hiring the rest of the cybersecurity guys: they don't have any fucking money. When a rep for FBI cyber-crime is standing up in front of your class more or less pleading with people to intern with the FBI, and even then he says that they can't offer anywhere near what the private sector can...

Yeah, cyber-security and penetration testing are very, very sought-after fields. Is it any wonder the only people who answer the FBI's want ads are the stoners?

Because God forbid anyone take any less money to do something for the common good right?

Having a mortgage, dependents, medical bills and college debt might be enough to outweigh someone's desire to serve the common good.

The Fed has some of the best benefits around as far as medical and college debt repayment and you can easily do all the things listed on an FBI salary. You just can't live in luxury which a lot of people just seem to think they're entitled to.

Block wrote: The Fed has some of the best benefits around as far as medical and college debt repayment and you can easily do all the things listed on an FBI salary.

Depends on how much your significant other wants to sacrifice their career to keep up with yours. There's a good chance you're going to be shipped off to a new city with the FBI and maybe your spouse is really, really invested in their current job.

You just can't live in luxury which a lot of people just seem to think they're entitled to.

What the fuck kind of an argument is that? How dare people want to live above subsistence levels!

Subsistence? We're talking Gs10 pay to start most likely. It's 80kish plus bennies.

Edit: Step 1(starting pay) is 75k including locality. You usually get promoted to GS 10 step 2 within a year or two, with the accompanying raise.

Block wrote:Subsistence? We're talking Gs10 pay to start most likely. It's 80kish plus bennies.

Edit: Step 1(starting pay) is 75k including locality. You usually get promoted to GS 10 step 2 within a year or two, with the accompanying raise.

Do you honestly think trying to guilt-trip people into feeling bad for wanting to make as much money with their skill-set as possible is going to convince . . . anybody to work for the FBI?

General Zod wrote:Do you honestly think trying to guilt-trip people into feeling bad for wanting to make as much money with their skill-set as possible is going to convince . . . anybody to work for the FBI?

It seems to work surprisingly well in many other areas of life.

Broomstick wrote:I thought FBI "hackers" were employed in a forensic capacity, investigating computer crimes. Perhaps you have confused the Federal Bureau of Investigation with the CIA or military cyber capabilities.

So, probably, have a lot of Computer Science graduates.

Although it has to be said that the FBI's own reputation is way down in the brown in many circles; see National Security Letters, their tendency to run sting operations just barely short of what's legally defined as entrapment and a great deal else.

General Zod wrote:

Block wrote:Subsistence? We're talking Gs10 pay to start most likely. It's 80kish plus bennies.

Edit: Step 1(starting pay) is 75k including locality. You usually get promoted to GS 10 step 2 within a year or two, with the accompanying raise.

Do you honestly think trying to guilt-trip people into feeling bad for wanting to make as much money with their skill-set as possible is going to convince . . . anybody to work for the FBI?

Your reading comprehension is really low hmm? I'm lamenting that people seem solely motivated by money at this point, as I believe it's unfortunate. Not anywhere near a guilt trip.

Block wrote:Your reading comprehension is really low hmm? I'm lamenting that people seem solely motivated by money at this point, as I believe it's unfortunate. Not anywhere near a guilt trip.

There are plenty of reasons hackers, programmers, etc would rather work in the private sector. Money is certianly one of them, but the lack of buracracy and the different mentality and culture are very large factors as well. There is a good article relating the death of the "company man" to the Snowden/NSA debacle. I suspect there will be significantly less hires in the years following the NSA relevations last summer.