Re: [SAGE] Getting hit by a truck (was Re: Thoughtsonpremise security.)

[Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>]

At 6:19 AM -0700 2003/10/21, Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:

>  Depends on the level of clearance, as to whether an S&G is appropriate, or
>  whether you need a fancy spin dial safe from hell (the proper name of those
>  escapes me).

	In terms of what we actually stored in those safes, it never went 
above Secret (with Secret/NATO in the one safe we had cleared for 
that), and most stuff was merely Confidential.  Still, the safes were 
cleared for up to TS, if the need had ever arisen.

>                            More likely you'd have had safes than standard
>  file cabinets with locking bars. I mean, those suckers can be taken apart
>  with a few tools (but it's going to be obvious).

	I know you could store Confidential in filing cabinets with 
locking bars, but I don't know if they could be cleared for Secret. 
I doubt that they could have been used for NATO documents, however.

>  It's funny that you'd never seen one, though.

	I've seen filing cabinets with locking bars.  I've just never 
seen any of them locked with the specific locking devices that S&G 
sells.  The filing cabinets I saw were secured with more mundane 
locks that looked little different than standard Master locks that 
you could buy down at any hardware store.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles@skynet.be>

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
     -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.

GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+
!w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)