[Goose]

It is impossible to generalize by age.

This is a statement that can’t be disproved. However, we aren’t living in a 100% world either, and a 21 yo AF NG Airman isn’t performing rocket surgery.

If age doesn’t matter, how is it impossible for mil to run without young people doing back office work? There are hundreds, maybe thousands of older adults who can do IT work. While it is true they can steal and expose national security information, the odds of them doing so are lower. This in an endeavor where it makes sense to reduce risk as much as possible. Older people with longer histories can be better vetted for security clearances than young people not much is known about.

Honestly, give those between 50 and 65 completely free healthcare before Medicare eligible, and recruiters would have to turn people away. It may or may not be feasible to do this, but the Pentagon has a big enough budget, and Congress could certainly look into how feasible opening up positions for older adults to do non-combat operations and be trusted with sensitive material, would be.

I wonder about that. Older people are far more likeliy to have crippling financial burdens and may be susceptible to bribes. I suspect they're more cynical and less idealistic.

It is very difficult to predict who will intentionally mishandle classified information. First of all, very few people do so. N is a really small number. The security clearance investigations have been relatively ineffective in identifying these people. All the people who are convicted of espionage passed their background checks. In general, the most serious leaks/spy operations have been committed by more mature people because those people tend to have better access to such data. Those that spy for ideological reasons often do little or no damage in their younger years because they simply don't "know" enough and the few young people who spy for money don't know enough (at least in the past) to make it worth the risk to employ them.

The security system is designed to restrict access to those people who really have a "need to know". That is directly responsible for the pattern of few younger people having much access. It also means that it is difficult for the opposition to get a complete picture from any given spy because that spy simply doesn't know it "all". Unfortunately the breakdown in that system has resulted in many unlikely people gaining access to lots of highly classified data. This data is often delivered in written form which is easy to duplicate. These people are not supervised by any security apparatus. In many cases these people  are simply careless and do not protect what they have/know. In other cases they disclose this data intentionally or make it easy for unauthorized people to obtain it. It has also generated situations where people intentionally reveal information to increase their own self-importance.

That was much less common in the past, although it did happen. That is exactly what Petraeus did. Teixeira did the same. The difference was that Petraeus was head of CIA. His failure to protect information was always going to be a big problem. Fortunately he only "leaked" it to one person who kept almost all of it to herself. Teixeira OTOH had no business having access to the kind of information he apparently did. His command didn't have a need to know, let alone him. Situations where relatively young people can give away important classified data are not new. Jeffrey Carney is an example. However, he didn't do it to gain status with his "peers", girlfriend, etc. Also, while he knew a lot about USAF Sigint, he didn't know anything about anything else. He didn't have access. That is the difference. Chelsea Manning OTOH was able to download lots of things she had no need to know and no legitimate "professional" interest in. Indeed, the system is broken.

[Goose]

It is impossible to generalize by age.

This is a statement that can’t be disproved. However, we aren’t living in a 100% world either, and a 21 yo AF NG Airman isn’t performing rocket surgery.

If age doesn’t matter, how is it impossible for mil to run without young people doing back office work? There are hundreds, maybe thousands of older adults who can do IT work. While it is true they can steal and expose national security information, the odds of them doing so are lower. This in an endeavor where it makes sense to reduce risk as much as possible. Older people with longer histories can be better vetted for security clearances than young people not much is known about.

Honestly, give those between 50 and 65 completely free healthcare before Medicare eligible, and recruiters would have to turn people away. It may or may not be feasible to do this, but the Pentagon has a big enough budget, and Congress could certainly look into how feasible opening up positions for older adults to do non-combat operations and be trusted with sensitive material, would be.

I wonder about that. Older people are far more likeliy to have crippling financial burdens and may be susceptible to bribes. I suspect they're more cynical and less idealistic.

It is very difficult to predict who will intentionally mishandle classified information. First of all, very few people do so. N is a really small number. The security clearance investigations have been relatively ineffective in identifying these people. All the people who are convicted of espionage passed their background checks. In general, the most serious leaks/spy operations have been committed by more mature people because those people tend to have better access to such data. Those that spy for ideological reasons often do little or no damage in their younger years because they simply don't "know" enough and the few young people who spy for money don't know enough (at least in the past) to make it worth the risk to employ them.

The security system is designed to restrict access to those people who really have a "need to know". That is directly responsible for the pattern of few younger people having much access. It also means that it is difficult for the opposition to get a complete picture from any given spy because that spy simply doesn't know it "all". Unfortunately the breakdown in that system has resulted in many unlikely people gaining access to lots of highly classified data. This data is often delivered in written form which is easy to duplicate. These people are not supervised by any security apparatus. In many cases these people  are simply careless and do not protect what they have/know. In other cases they disclose this data intentionally or make it easy for unauthorized people to obtain it. It has also generated situations where people intentionally reveal information to increase their own self-importance.

That was much less common in the past, although it did happen. That is exactly what Petraeus did. Teixeira did the same. The difference was that Petraeus was head of CIA. His failure to protect information was always going to be a big problem. Fortunately he only "leaked" it to one person who kept almost all of it to herself. Teixeira OTOH had no business having access to the kind of information he apparently did. His command didn't have a need to know, let alone him. Situations where relatively young people can give away important classified data are not new. Jeffrey Carney is an example. However, he didn't do it to gain status with his "peers", girlfriend, etc. Also, while he knew a lot about USAF Sigint, he didn't know anything about anything else. He didn't have access. That is the difference. Chelsea Manning OTOH was able to download lots of things she had no need to know and no legitimate "professional" interest in. Indeed, the system is broken.