True. That may be the reason why the same website published the following two days later: State Department Telephone Directory May 2010, http://cryptome.org/state-phones.zip
As far as i understand the abbreviations define "USEO" as "United states Embassy Office" [page A-2], however nothing in the name listing contains "USEO". The document is unclassified after all. However it may very well contain past or future "spooks".
I think we can assume that agents attached to embassies are probably well known to the local intelligence agencies in whatever country they're in. This is absolutely fine from the agency's point of view, since the CIA needs a big operation in Beijing (and conversely the Chinese need a big operation in Washington) and it makes much more sense to run it semi-openly within the embassy, since the alternative is to attempt to run a big covert operation outside the embassy.
I think we can also assume that in countries where it matters there are probably spies who are not employed by the embassies and who may or may not be known to the local intelligence agencies.
I guess in conclusion, you shouldn't go around feeling all clever just because you've figured out some secret that you think some intelligence agency didn't want you to know. They have layers upon layers of secrets, and some of them are designed to be discovered.
>> I guess in conclusion, you shouldn't go around feeling
>> all clever just because you've figured out some secret
>> that you think some intelligence agency didn't want you >> to know.
I understand what you are saying between the lines. The problem still is i didnt expose a secret when i referenced a unclassified document, which was uploaded by a third party. Also i didnt say that no agency would want me to know.
>> They have layers upon layers of secrets, and some of
>> them are designed to be discovered.
I feel this is a good analogy for this audience. [Edit: a good analogy of people in this audience who work with software stacks.]
