ArmyProperty.com

ArmyProperty.com Forums
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 7:36 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Use this forum to ask questions about GP topics such as equipment you're trying to find, or other things that you'd like to see added to the site. To do this, click on the "New Topic" button and make your request. (Please make sure your question isn't covered by one of the other forums.)



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: RE: OPSEC
PostPosted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 11:43 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 5:43 pm
Posts: 565
To the individual who made the anonymous post regarding OPSEC on Friday 11 July: I would recommend that you read our OPSEC policy, to get a better understanding of what we do (and don't do) at ArmyProperty.com; here's the link:

http://www.armyproperty.com/OPSEC.htm

Bottom line:

1. All the information in our collection of NSN lists, and our document library, is widely available on the internet, and is unclassified. We do not "leak" sensitive or classified data, although it can be found elsewhere on the internet. The value we provide to our registered users is in bringing the information together for them in one place, to save them dozens (or hundreds) of hours searching for it on their own. This is especially useful to people who are, for example, preparing for change of command inventories, or RIP/TOA, or even monthly 10% inventories. These types of people do not usually have large amounts of spare time on their hands to conduct research of their own.

2. We do not collect any information from our users other than the bare minimum that is needed to establish their identity as legitimate U.S. Army Soldiers or DA Civilians. Specifically, we don't collect UIC's, unit addresses, or complete unit designations. We require account applicants to disclose AKO addresses, for example, partly to prevent a flood of applications from outside organizations or individuals. This service is intended for the Army only; in the future, we will release versions for other agencies.

3. This site is not intended as a substitute for the Army's official "STAMIS" systems such as ULLS-S4, PBUSE, or SAMS-E. It is meant to provide a limited degree of functionality for Soldiers and leaders who do not have access to those systems, and who are currrently using substandard "work-arounds" such as hand-written / photocopied documents, Excel spreadsheets, and MS Access databases. It is also meant to address weaknesses in the existing official systems, such as inferior capabilities for managing subcomponent accountability, until those systems are working more efficiently.

Thanks for the post! If you've got any additional questions, please feel free to contact us directly.
-The ArmyProperty team


Report this post
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: RE: OPSEC
PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:53 pm 
Considering OPSEC has nothing to do with classified data, I would say up are not fully aware of the implications of what you are doing with this site.

Glad you decidied that my original post was so far off base, that you felt the need to delete it and leave a response.

Best of Luck


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: RE: OPSEC
PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:15 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 5:43 pm
Posts: 565
To Anonymous:

No offense intended -- it is our SOP to delete threatening posts from anonymous individuals.

We are already in contact with US Army NETCOM, and are in the process of initiating discussions with A-GNOSC (the Army Global Network Operations and Security Center). Multiple officers at the rank of O-6 and above, including at least two Brigade level commanders, have been briefed on our site. Instead of a negative response, most have expressed relief that Soldiers and leaders finally have the tools they need to prevent the kinds of multi-million dollar losses that are happening on a constant basis under the current system. (A lost ANCD or ASIP radio is one heck of an OPSEC threat.)

We routinely get comments such as the following (exact quotation from a message we received this morning), from account applicants at the Supply NCO, Company Commander, Battalion / Brigade S4, and sometimes Divison / Corps G4 level: "IN IRAQ IN DESPERATE NEED OF COEI AND BII INFO. LIW TAKES TOO LONG TO LOAD WHAT I NEED!"

The ArmyProperty.com team includes individuals with multiple "outside the FOB" combat deployments, from the Fire Team Leader to Company Commander level. Our company president has completed 46 months of overseas service since October, 2000, including two OIF tours. We share your concerns about information security in a time of war. Sadly, though, there is already an internet "leak" site (that will not be named here, but is not hard to find) which contains the complete contents of every deployed property book in Iraq and Afghanistan, down to the UIC level, and which appears to have been leaked by a person who had access to the current system (PBUSE). So there are a lot of places to start fixing OPSEC. This is not meant as a flippant response, but again, we don't store targetable data such as UIC's, FOB locations, or maintenance / readiness data. We don't even know our own users' passwords, since they are 2-way encrypted.

Nearly 4,000 Soldiers and DA Civilians are currently using ArmyProperty.com to assist them in their official duties. It would be most unfortunate if people -- like the majority of our users -- who are at the trigger puller level, were deprived of a vital resource which is unavailable anywhere else.

We are more than ready to share whatever other technical / security information you are interested in, over email or telephone. Please contact us at the following link and we will be in touch ASAP.

http://armyproperty.com/app/ap/contact_us.php


Report this post
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: RE: OPSEC
PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:22 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 5:43 pm
Posts: 565
To Anonymous:

We have still not heard directly from you, and it has been over a week since you first posted on our message board. However, based on your IP address, we believe that you are posting from the 516th Signal Brigade at Fort Shafter, Hawaii. That being the case, we have contacted Mr. Grant Lam who runs the R-CERT at the 516th HQ. We are working with him to identify, explore, and address any potential "OPSEC issues" (although, not having heard directly from you, we do not know the exact nature of your concerns, so we are having to guess what they might be). He has already conducted an analysis of our site and is satisfied with the security measures that we have in place. We again encourage you to contact us privately if you have any further questions, using the link which we provided in our previous post.

Thanks,
The ArmyProperty Team


Report this post
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: RE: OPSEC
PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 4:55 pm 
The real issue here is not OPSEC, as you have eloquently rebutted, but the cumbersome and outdated nature of the current property accountability system. Perhaps the Army should catch-up with existing technology and enable soldiers instead of making their jobs more difficult via severely outdated systems & equipment.

Good work, and on behalf of those of us who have cursed the ULLS system repeatedly in years gone by, THANKS.


Last bumped by Anonymous on Sat Jun 13, 2009 4:55 pm.


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

phpBB SEO