Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Amazon Hints At Details On Its CIA Franken-Cloud

samzenpus posted about 10 months ago | from the a-different-kind dept.

Cloud 67

coondoggie writes "Amazon Web Services recently won a reported $600 million contract to build the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) a cloud. But that cloud will not look like any other cloud on the planet. Amazon will build the cloud using AWS architectures and AWS will manage it, but executives hinted that it will not be accessed the way other customers use AWS services through the public Internet. 'We're managing the operations in the data center,' Andy Jassy, Amazon's senior vice president and the head of the company's cloud computing division AWS said about the CIA deal. 'It's our hardware, it's our networking.'"

cancel ×

67 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431341)

It's not really "ze cloud" then, right? Fuck, I'm tired of hearing that word.

Re:So... (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 10 months ago | (#45431385)

It's not really "ze cloud" then, right? Fuck, I'm tired of hearing that word.

'Cloud' is a pretty nebulous term. Like it or loath it (the latter being the correct answer), it is definitely sometimes applied to purely internal arrangements, if the internal infrastructure has been sufficiently abstracted in a manner similar to that used by one of the external 'cloud' services.

The trivial case would be an internal Eucalyptus [eucalyptus.com] implementation, where the entire point is to be wholly compatible with a public cloud provider, either for code reuse or for expansion options. Where exactly the dividing line between something like this, and 'yeah, sure, the devs probably all have a copy of VMware Workstation. Why?' is a matter for largely fruitless debate.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431449)

"My name? My name is Mario Antonio Scubafitz, and I am one with you." Such arrogance.

Re:So... (4, Funny)

niftydude (1745144) | about 10 months ago | (#45431491)

'Cloud' is a pretty nebulous...

I see what you did there.

Re:So... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431563)

'Cloud' is a pretty nebulous...

I see what you did there.

What? By pointing out that cloud providers make stratospheric claims? I didn' t mean to precipitate an argument....

Re:So... (1)

ApplePy (2703131) | about 10 months ago | (#45436277)

Cirrusly?

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431661)

I see what the guys who came up with the term in the first place did, too.

Re:So... (4, Funny)

zdzichu (100333) | about 10 months ago | (#45431551)

I strongly recommend Cloud-to-butt Chrome extension [google.com] . You won't see "cloud" anymore and your browsing experience will be massively improved (and funnier).

Re:So... (1, Funny)

RaceProUK (1137575) | about 10 months ago | (#45431663)

Wait, is this a Cloud-to-butt plug?

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431917)

who needs a butt-to-butt chrome extension ? Better use the Cloud-to-butt extension, it works great although sometimes it can be confusing.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431815)

I'm worried this will cause me to disregard important articles about butts and butt services, thinking they are just cloud hype.

Re:So... (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | about 10 months ago | (#45436961)

I strongly recommend butt-to-butt Chrome extension. You won't see "my butt" anymore and your browsing experience will be massively improved (and funnier).

Thank god I don't work in a clothing optional workplace where I would have to see your butt in the first place.

Re:So... (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 10 months ago | (#45433665)

Right, exactly. Were it really "ze cloud", one would think it would be a big juicy target. Imagine -- a major CIA data collection just hanging out somewhere on the internet. Anonymous must be wetting themselves in excitement.

And I agree, "cloud" is the second most abused term this decade, right behind "disrespecting".

It's Ours? (1, Insightful)

dcw3 (649211) | about 10 months ago | (#45431379)

'It's our hardware, it's our networking.'"

Until they tell us it's not.

Re:It's Ours? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431407)

It actually has to be owned by Amazon. If the equipment was to be procured directly by the government, it would mean that the CIA would have to procure it through traditional federal procurement channels which means that any approved vendor can bid on it, meaning that Amazon would have no control over the selected hardware.

By allowing Amazon to own the equipment and merely lease it from them via a services contract, this means that Amazon can select the hardware that they believe is best to accomplish the mission without worrying about the bidding process, procurement regulations, or protests.

Re:It's Ours? (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 10 months ago | (#45431473)

That sort of bundling is probably attractive to a spook shop for secrecy reasons, as well.

The details would remain hazy; but a public bid would provide some fodder for educated guesses, and the more detailed the breakdown of the goods being procured, the better a guess anybody reasonably skilled in the art of datacenter-wrangling could make about exactly what sort of capacity they are building.

A nice, round, lump sum, on the other hand, provides only the roughest of outlines.

Re:It's Ours? (1)

dcw3 (649211) | about 10 months ago | (#45431535)

Incorrect. There are plenty of ways for the government to sole source products. It's done all the time.

Re:It's Ours? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45432639)

like healthcare.gov!

There WAS a bidding process, and a protest (1)

SpammersAreScum (697628) | about 10 months ago | (#45440797)

You seem to be making some incorrect assumptions. There was a bidding process. Amazon's bid was selected over IBM's. IBM did protest. They lost [crn.com] .

Re:It's Ours? (4, Insightful)

FlyHelicopters (1540845) | about 10 months ago | (#45431561)

Until they tell us it's not.

Couldn't have said it better myself...

Unless Amazon plans to hire its own paramilitary force to provide security at its data centers and is willing to fight anyone who tries to show up and "take over" (and blow it up if they cannot prevent the take over), then it is just hot air.

When the guys with the guns show up, your rights start and stop there.

Way too many people sitting behind their keyboards/tablets/smartphones seem to forget that point.

Re:It's Ours? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431781)

When the guys with the guns show up, your rights start and stop there.

Except there will be no guys with guns showing up, and our rights start and stop with the people permanently there in the building.

Or so they are making their best efforts to achieve.

Re:It's Ours? (1)

FlyHelicopters (1540845) | about 10 months ago | (#45432003)

Yes, yes, I know... Amazon will do what they are told like good little corporate citizens.

I was just saying that if Amazon decided to turn off the servers and not give the CIA access to *everyones* data, my example would then happen. Or something similar to it.

Re:It's Ours? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431889)

What are you even talking about, you idiot?

They didn't say "we're going to take this datacenter with all the CIA's data and keep it away from them". They said "we're going to manage this datacenter for the CIA at their request".

What would be the point of "showing up with guns"? Is the government so poor that they have to kill their contractors to get out of paying the bill?

Re:It's Ours? (1)

FlyHelicopters (1540845) | about 10 months ago | (#45431987)

Oh, now stop trying to make sense, this is SlashDot! :)

I was making fun of the idea that Amazon "owns" the hardware and networking equipment.

The idea is that they "own" it just as long as the CIA wants them to. If the CIA decided they wanted to own it, they could.

Would they? No, of course not, but the principle is sound.

So long as they are comfortable that the data is secure and that they can access it any time they want, I doubt the CIA really cares.

If Amazon decided to "turn off" their servers, that is when my example would come into play. But I tend to agree with you that Amazon will just do whatever they are told.

That's very silly (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 10 months ago | (#45431391)

If any concern should know better than falling for the cloud BS, especially one that's managed by another, private concern, it's the CIA. Jesus, even I, Mister Nobody, don't put anything in any cloud that matters, and keep my own valuable (to me) data on my own servers...

Re:That's very silly (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 10 months ago | (#45431483)

If any concern should know better than falling for the cloud BS, especially one that's managed by another, private concern, it's the CIA. Jesus, even I, Mister Nobody, don't put anything in any cloud that matters, and keep my own valuable (to me) data on my own servers...

Ironically, since Amazon has a Server Access Logging [amazon.com] system (which can be fairly robust and powerful, if you set it up), there's an argument to be made that they are a step ahead of the NSA on that score...

Re:That's very silly (0)

FlyHelicopters (1540845) | about 10 months ago | (#45431567)

Your point has merit, but I'm just curious...

What data do you have that you don't want the CIA/NSA to have?

Your tax returns? They have that already. Your bank account info? They have that already.

Unless you have secret plans to do something illegal, I highly doubt you have much they don't already have access to, much less do they care about you.

That does not make your concerns or point invalid, nor does it mean you should have to hand anything over.

I'm just asking the question.

Re:That's very silly (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431761)

Your point has merit, but I'm just curious...

What data do you have that you don't want the CIA/NSA to have?

Everything they don't already have.

Your tax returns? They have that already. Your bank account info? They have that already.

Actually the IRS should have that, they're not supposed to be sharing that information with the CIA or NSA either....

Unless you have secret plans to do something illegal, I highly doubt you have much they don't already have access to, much less do they care about you.

Until they turn your own desires into public crimes? Besides if you've got nothing to hide comrade, you don't care if we listen to everything you do, right? Ask any former East German how they feel about the Stasi...

I'm just asking the question

I'm asking the question if the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution means anything to you or anybody fucking else in this country anymore. It's fuckers like you that has allowed the surveillance state to take hold. Keep watching the TV buddy....

Re:That's very silly (1)

FlyHelicopters (1540845) | about 10 months ago | (#45432023)

You totally misunderstand... I'm fully in support of the 4th amendment, the NSA shouldn't be able to just look at anything you have.

My question is, if they do look at your computer, do you have anything they'd care about? I guess if you did, you probably wouldn't say so here. :)

Should the IRS keep my tax returns away from the NSA? Yes. Do they? No, I don't believe it for a second. I believe that the NSA can, more or less, access all of that and more with just a few keystrokes.

Is this a good thing? No, but there isn't anything I can do about it either. I can't ask Congress to change it, they don't work for me, they work for whomever pays their bills, and I'm being outspent.

Again, not saying that is just, just that it is.

... do you have anything they'd care about? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45435853)

"My question is, if they do look at your computer, do you have anything they'd care about?"

Why yes, I do.

Pron, plenty of pron for them to jerk-off to.

Re:That's very silly (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 10 months ago | (#45433357)

What data do you have that you don't want the CIA/NSA to have?

how about creative writing or inner thoughts (journal, diary)?

one might write things that are fantasy or just mere thoughts; but if taken out of context, could get you into a world of hurt!

besides, the 'if you are not doing anything wrong, dont fear!' is PURE BULLSHIT and anyone using that argument needs to be rejected outright.

other than things you might write about, there is also corporate data that you may not want to 'wander' anywhere.

clouds are stupid, for security. and who does not want their data to be safe and secure?

I hope the whole cloud storage thing fades away. we should all know better (and many of us knew this from the start).

Re:That's very silly (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 10 months ago | (#45431741)

If you think of this as:

1) Corporate welfare to the tune of $600,000,000 to Amazon;

2) Just another way for the CIA to abuse people its friends don't like, with no concern for integrity;

then everything will fall neatly into place.

Re:That's very silly (1)

r_newman (40868) | about 10 months ago | (#45433553)

If you think of this as:

1) Corporate welfare to the tune of $600,000,000 to Amazon;

2) Just another way for the CIA to abuse people its friends don't like, with no concern for integrity;

then everything will fall neatly into place.

This really reads like sour grapes. Yes, they are a large corporation, but that doesn't make them another Walmart or McDonalds, ripping off the whole country by paying workers too little to live on. Amazon pays pretty decent money, not great, but pretty competitive if you include the stock (not stock OPTIONS, actual stock). They're going to have to provide a service and facilities to the CIA for the money so it doesn't play as corporate welfare in this context either. When it comes to cloud services, like it or not, they have more experience of what it takes to do this at scale than anyone else, and they already run secure cloud facilities (Amazon GovCloud). It's a logical decision.

As for the CIA, my personal opinion is that they're a bunch of amoral scum, who for the most part belong in jail cells and that they will do anything it takes to facilitate their criminal abuse of taxpayers money.

Re:That's very silly (1)

lgw (121541) | about 10 months ago | (#45435395)

ripping off the whole country by paying workers too little to live on

Not all jobs should pay enough to live on. Teenagers still living at home need easy-to-get first jobs (and it's not just teens of course, but anyone needing that first job). That's a critical element of society that has been diminishing lately.

Re:That's very silly (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 10 months ago | (#45436471)

OOI, how are those not living at home supposed to survive if their first job does not pay a living wage?

Re:That's very silly (1)

lgw (121541) | about 10 months ago | (#45437785)

Charity, government or otherwise. Same way they'll survive if they can't get that first job. (Or, in the case of some people my age, it's the wife getting her first job since her teenage years now that the kids are gone, supported by her husband. That 1950s pattern is still around, here and there.)

As a general rule of thumb, the sort of companies that offer first job to workers that are not only unskilled, but new at even proper workplace behavior, have low margins and a fairly fixed amount they can spend on salary - how many people do you want to divide that pool up between? An "entitled special flower" (ahem, "living") wage means higher youth unemployment (and more young people leaving college having never had a real job to learn that proper workplace behavior). A lower minimum wage means it's much easier to get a first job, but you need to move up to get a living wage.

Re:That's very silly (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 10 months ago | (#45438161)

I think "proper workplace behaviour" is one of those meaningless concepts used to justify underpaying employees on the grounds of, "Well they don't even know how to work properly, so this is actually training rather than a proper job."

It's how employers in the UK are being subsidised by the government, as people collecting unemployment are required to do unpaid work "for experience".

I got my first paid job as follows:
1. Turn up at 8:30am on Monday morning for 9am start;
2. Spend an hour or two being guided round and introduced to relevant people, signing relevant documents, etc.;
3. Start work proper around 11am.

I think the only time I got called up for poor etiquette (embarrassing, but whatever) was turning up a couple of times on a warm morning not having had a shower. Geeks will be geeks and forget social graces. Boss took me aside for a polite word. 3 minutes.

Re:That's very silly (1)

lgw (121541) | about 10 months ago | (#45438979)

I think "proper workplace behaviour" is one of those meaningless concepts used to justify underpaying employees on the grounds of, "Well they don't even know how to work properly, so this is actually training rather than a proper job."

You mean things like showing up on time, appropriately groomed, and working your shift are just meaningless concepts? It's easy if your way of living naturally includes doing that sort of thing, but for many it's a real shift.

But anyhow, while "unpaid internships" and the like are clearly exploitive, I hadn't heard it taken to that UK extreme yet. Eesh. There's still room between "living wage" and "0" for your first job, though.

Re:That's very silly (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 10 months ago | (#45439075)

Not meaningless at all. But I think it's misleading to say that it's a huge adjustment.

Yup, it's that bad in the UK - and the justification is precisely that it's necessary work experience for people who haven't yet got the hang of "getting a real job". Even to the extent that people on part time volunteer placements after university (e.g. at a museum - high profile example) have been required to quit that and instead work unpaid retail jobs (which would be min wage if they weren't instead filled by these people). So, on the one hand, you have people doing jobseeking activity AND doing relevant volunteer work being made to work irrelevant jobs; and on the other, you have people who would be in minimum wage jobs being fired so the jobs can be filled under this scheme.

It is nothing more than state-subsidised employment for the "work programme" providers, and it is one of the most unjust things to happen to the British workplace in recent memory.

Re:That's very silly (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 10 months ago | (#45436453)

Oh, it's the "only following orders" excuse, except with Amazon not even being forced to work for the CIA.

Does nobody take responsibility for the consequences of their actions any more?

Re:That's very silly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431797)

If any concern should know better than falling for the cloud BS, especially one that's managed by another, private concern, it's the CIA. Jesus, even I, Mister Nobody, don't put anything in any cloud that matters, and keep my own valuable (to me) data on my own servers...

Amazon has been a wholly-owned subsidiary of the US Government for some time now.

Re: That's very silly (1)

crdotson (224356) | about 10 months ago | (#45441265)

I'm with you, man! Screw cloud computing; I don't even trust these new-fangled computer things. And paper? That stuff can be PHOTOCOPIED!

Lies by ommission? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431453)

With a very fast direct one way link from the public cloud?

does it smell like (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431493)

frankincense?

worthless read (4, Insightful)

Gravis Zero (934156) | about 10 months ago | (#45431501)

AWS is building the CIA a massive private cloud that will run AWS infrastructure, but it will sit in a CIA data center.

there, that's the entire article in one sentence.

Re:worthless read (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431645)

And now we know for certain Amazon is working with the CIA, it makes me feel better about cancelling my account. I cannot prevent them from doing so, but I don't have to do business with a company whose business partner is quite well practiced at extra judicial murders.

Re:worthless read (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431713)

You had an account with the CIA?

Re:worthless read (1)

torsmo (1301691) | about 10 months ago | (#45436235)

It was terminated.

Re:worthless read (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431809)

AWS is building the CIA a massive private cloud that will run AWS infrastructure, but it will sit in a CIA data center.

there, that's the entire article in one sentence.

Yes, and a "massive private cloud" sitting inside a data center is also known as a file server to the other 99.999% of the IT world.

Oh, and the CIA is far too stupid to run a file server, so they hired Amazon to do it.

There, that's your no-shit summary.

Franken-cloud? Really? (3, Informative)

wiredog (43288) | about 10 months ago | (#45431569)

It's a private cloud solution. Like the dozens of private clouds set up by RedHat (among others) in the Federal space.

RFC 1149 (3, Funny)

Guppy06 (410832) | about 10 months ago | (#45431593)

but executives hinted that it will not be accessed the way other customers use AWS services through the public Internet.

That leaves only one possible option [wikipedia.org] .

Re:RFC 1149 (1)

Errol backfiring (1280012) | about 10 months ago | (#45431991)

Or sneakernet.

isn't this like the old SIPRNET? (2)

alen (225700) | about 10 months ago | (#45431623)

in the 90's the military had their own IP web based cloud. accessed it via internet explorer like any other website except it was physically separate from the non-secure internet WWW that everyone wasted time on

Re:isn't this like the old SIPRNET? (2)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 10 months ago | (#45431793)

Aaaaaand we still have it. And 30+ other seperate intranets of various classifications. (IAA Intelligence Analyst)

Re:isn't this like the old SIPRNET? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45436371)

WOAH! So you are saying that large organizations run their own networks, and on these networks they run things like WEB SITES?!!!!????!!!

NOOOOH WEAY!!

Cloud-to-Butt (1)

Cyfun (667564) | about 10 months ago | (#45431647)

It's days like this that I just love the Chrome extension that changes all instances of the word "cloud" to "butt."

Here's one of the job descriptions.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45431659)

I received an unsolicited email from Amazon letting me know about the exciting opportunity for a systems engineer position for this project (I'm only presuming, I don't know for sure). Not exactly my cup of tea, but the SSBI requirement along with '+1 years' in all of the technical requirements scared me off. (i.e. they're throwing out a really wide net for "talent"). Also, shift work? No thanks!

The really interesting part of this to me is that the requirements for clearance imply that first tier engineers will be potentially exposed to sensitive data. Has Amazon learned nothing from the Snowden exposures? If not, here's a summary:

* Encrypt your data
* Compartmentalize access
* First tier pizza box coroners shouldn't have access to sensitive data. They don't need it, they shouldn't have it. If they do, its because your system isn't design to be secure. Simply creating a 'new' separate cloud only compartmentalizes the risk.

I'll even go as far to make a joking assert that it'd probably be more secure in the existing AWS cloud since attackers would have to sift through petabytes of crap before they found anything interesting.

There should be technology in place to ensure that a non-cleared engineer (or even a bad actor http://mikedaisey.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] could be hired for this role.

My name is XXXXXXXXXX, and I am a recruiting coordinator with Amazon Web Services. We recently reviewed your profile and our hiring team is interested in speaking with you about a new project that we are working on. We are looking for candidates who are interested in obtaining and maintaining a US Government Security Clearance and we feel that your background and skills are a good fit for the role and would like to schedule a phone interview with you. Please be aware that because AWS runs in a 24x7 environment, all System Engineer and Support Engineer candidates will need to be open to shift work if hired.

I have included a high level job description below to give you a general idea about the roles we have in AWS. For more specific information about Amazon Web Services and our teams, please visit: http://aws.amazon.com/ [amazon.com] . Please note, we have other positions available, so if this role doesnâ(TM)t pique your interest, please let us know what you are interested in and we can find a more suitable opportunity.

These roles would require you to relocate to the Seattle, WA or Herndon, VA area. Please let us know what your location preference is so that we may find an appropriate team. We will provide relocation assistance and more information will be available further into the process.

If you are interested in learning more and talking with a member of the team, please send me your availability for a phone interview (between 10:00am-4:00pm PST) for the next two weeks, as well as the best phone number to use for this conversation. Please keep in mind that phone interviews can take up to 75 minutes to complete. We are looking to fill this position as soon as possible, so please let me know if you have any questions or concerns that I can address.

Thank you for your time and we look forward to hearing from you soon.

Amazon Web Services is a dynamic and rapidly growing business within Amazon.com. We are building some of the largest and most complex distributed systems in the world, and we need world class people to help us implement and operate them.

We provide organizations with building block web services that allow them to innovate faster and operate their software more cost-effectively. These services-in-the-cloud include on-demand compute capacity, storage, content delivery, querying of structured data, message queuing, and more.

We have high standards for our computer systems as well as our employees: our systems are highly secure, highly reliable, highly available, and must function at massive scale; our employees are super smart, driven to serve customers, and fun to work with. The successful Systems Engineer does much more than plug computers together or track changes. They are instrumental in deploying, operating, and scaling a massive always-on distributed system that is core to all of AWS. We are looking for a seasoned Systems Engineer to join our energetic, fast-moving and passionate team.

You should have or be most of the following:

Experience running and maintaining a 24x7 Internet-oriented production environment, preferably across multiple data centers, involving (preferably) hundreds of machines
Demonstrable expertise around specifying, designing, and/or implementing system health, performance monitoring tools, and software management tools for 24x7 environments
A solid grasp of networking fundamentals, preferably including hands-on experience with load balancers, switches, routers, etc.
Familiar with the challenges surrounding efficient operations and failure mode analysis in large complex distributed systems
You will be expected to deliver on these kinds of things in the first six to twelve months on the job:

Through participation in all phases of the development of a large distributed system; providing hardware, manageability, operability and performance perspectives on all aspects of the system

Define and/or refine hardware requirements and selected designs, balancing raw up-front dollar cost with operability and TCO, from the data center infrastructure up specify and participate in the development and delivery of operability-related features such as system health monitoring, diagnostics, repair, and other self-healing automation
Develop or further existing application and system management tools and processes that reduce manual efforts and increase overall efficiency

Adapt and improve operations management systems and processes to accommodate rapid and increasing growth in systems and traffic
Participate in the design and execution of production acceptance tests and new hardware evaluations

Maintain fleet inventory management, including producing, maintaining, and evolving capacity plans for various components
Monitor the health of the fleet, automating system health, maintenance tasks, and reporting systems as needed

Perform various system maintenance tasks (your hands get dirty here), including configuration of new machines

Manage directly assigned tasks and on-call duties gracefully

Basic Qualifications:

* Bachelor's degree in computer science, computer engineering or related technical discipline
* 1+ years of operating *NIX systems administration or development
* 1+ Experience with scripting Python, Ruby, Perl, or similar languages
* 1+ Experience with support procedures and methodologies for production computing environments

This position requires the applicant selected to obtain and maintain a Top Secret security clearance with Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) eligibility and access. A US Government administered polygraph examination will be required. TS/SCI eligibility is not required to start; however, the applicant selected will be subject to a Single-Scope Background Investigation (SSBI) and must meet eligibility requirements for access to classified national security information. Applicants with a current SSBI, SBPR, or PPR, may be eligible for crossover in accordance with ICPG 704.
Preferred Qualifications:

* 1+ year experience running and maintaining a 24x7 production environment
* 1+ Experience with service-oriented architecture and web services
* Experience with very large, high-throughput distributed systems
* Systems Administration or Development in a Linux/Unix environment
* Programming/scripting in Python and/or Ruby in a Unix/Linux environment
* Experience with some aspect(s) of computer security: network security, application security, security protocols, cryptography, etc.
* Excellent troubleshooting and documentation skills
* Familiar with the challenges surrounding efficient operations and failure mode analysis in large complex distributed systems
* Able to show good judgment and instincts in decision making
* Able to prioritize and perform in complex, fast-paced situation
* Experience with agile software development practices

Re:Here's one of the job descriptions.. (1)

alen (225700) | about 10 months ago | (#45431985)

just the fact that you can touch the servers, the routers and the wires where this data sits on means you will need a top secret SSBI clearance. having the clearance doesn't mean you will see the cool data since need to know applies

when i was in the army there were jobs where new privates were required to get a top secret clearance just to be in that job field. if you couldn't get the clearance they sent you off to infantry school

Re:Here's one of the job descriptions.. (1)

kriston (7886) | about 10 months ago | (#45435659)

You would need to be read into the specific program, not necessarily called "need to know" but something similar. Those are the funky letters after the "TS." Not every program requires "SSBI," either. There could be programs require even more than that, or not even that much.

Amazon (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#45431783)

Reminds me of Singer and IBM 75 from years ago..

Duzzit use the HPC clusters? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45432685)

Item 1: Amazon inks $600M cloud services deal with CIA.

Item 2: CIA collecting bulk data from financial transactions

Item 3: BTC breaks $400 USD

Is the CIA running a mining pool and data-mining the block chain? That would be logical. Not to mention efficient.

Too logical for the Treasury Department, of course, but there may be some hope for Commerce.

Re:Duzzit use the HPC clusters? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45433063)

I read this over after posting, and I see my sarcasm index is way up today, so, as a modest proposal, I'll refrain from further posting on this subject.

Re:Duzzit use the HPC clusters? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45434237)

If that is the case, then shouldn't they be respected for being self-funding and not being on the taxpayer dime?

Will it host? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45432851)

The Pirate Bay :-)

Distributed (1)

Princeofcups (150855) | about 10 months ago | (#45433227)

I bet it's distributed to every single VM server and network device that they have. You know, just a little agent to capture all data from all customers at the source.

Amazon Hints At Details On Its CIA Franken-Cloud (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | about 10 months ago | (#45433867)

Leave it to the leader of the "Me" generation to get his name branded onto anything he can.

If you can't book 'em (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 10 months ago | (#45437571)

join 'em.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>