• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

"Review of polygraph tests stokes privacy fears at cyber spy agency"

The Bread Guy

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,387
Points
1,260
One of the things being looked at: using polygraphs as part of the hiring process
The watchdog body overseeing Canada's intelligence agencies is looking into whether polygraph tests — popularly known as lie detector tests — should be used to hire spies.

Its investigation has some of Canada's cyber intelligence officials worried that their most personal information could be viewed by strangers.

The National Security and Intelligence Review Agency [NSIRA] is in the midst of reviewing internal security programs at the Communication Security Establishment [CSE], the foreign signals intelligence agency. Among other things, NSIRA is looking into whether the use of polygraph tests in CSE recruitment "is lawful, reasonable and necessary."

NSIRA investigators say that, as part of this review, they need to review a sample of recorded polygraph interviews taken by current CSE employees and applicants.

That's causing some alarm at CSE HQ in Ottawa.

"Employees expose very personal information during the polygraph examination which is designed to assess factors such as loyalty and reliability," said CSE spokesperson Evan Koronewski.

"The examination of the audiovisual recordings of polygraph interviews has raised concerns from both CSE management and CSE employees." ...
More at the NSIRA's review terms of reference page here.
 
Polygraph in and of itself is a poor assessor of someone's reliability or loyalty. It also doesn't consider the more pertinent external factors involved in data breaches or traitorous acts:

-monetary issues
-criminal exploitation and extortion
-disgruntled or dissolutioned employees
-improper access/poor IM practices
-user incompetence

Those influence behaviour a lot more than "if this guy twitches when we ask of he's sexually attracted to flowers, he's going to sell us out to the Russians..."
 
Polygraph in and of itself is a poor assessor of someone's reliability or loyalty. It also doesn't consider the more pertinent external factors involved in data breaches or traitorous acts:

-monetary issues
-criminal exploitation and extortion
-disgruntled or dissolutioned employees
-improper access/poor IM practices
-user incompetence

Those influence behaviour a lot more than "if this guy twitches when we ask of he's sexually attracted to flowers, he's going to sell us out to the Russians..."
It’s the lazy background check, uses less resources, takes less time.

And gives you the quality results all shortcuts get you,
 
Whether the things actually work is probably a question that should have been asked before polygraphs were made a Treasury Board standard for certain security clearances. A standard that was put in place almost 10 years ago.
 
A good system doesn’t just do a poly - but has a very in depth psych and background as well. So it has a clear baseline and has rules out a number of false issues prior.

It also has reviews annually.
 
Polygraph in and of itself is a poor assessor of someone's reliability or loyalty. It also doesn't consider the more pertinent external factors involved in data breaches or traitorous acts:

-monetary issues
-criminal exploitation and extortion
-disgruntled or dissolutioned employees
-improper access/poor IM practices
-user incompetence

Those influence behaviour a lot more than "if this guy twitches when we ask of he's sexually attracted to flowers, he's going to sell us out to the Russians..."
Wait, what kind of flowers?

Huh- there is now a black van outside my front d…..
 
George Costanza Seinfeld GIF
 
Whether the things actually work is probably a question that should have been asked before polygraphs were made a Treasury Board standard for certain security clearances. A standard that was put in place almost 10 years ago.
Standard in place due to allies insisting it be there.

Not because of any evidence of efficacy... And we'll documented methods to defeat it are attacked with regularity.
 
In law enforcement, a polygraph is a prop; a centre piece on the table, used by a trained forensic interviewer. I realize HR matters are different, but the fact that polygraph results are inadmissible in court should be a hint.
 
In law enforcement, a polygraph is a prop; a centre piece on the table, used by a trained forensic interviewer. I realize HR matters are different, but the fact that polygraph results are inadmissible in court should be a hint.
Not all courts ;)
 
Back
Top