Sometimes it's based on outdated concern. Whereas, in the area of biological weapons, I think more should be classified than is. Danneskiold says the issue there isn't what's classified, but as how such information is handled. Those procedures ensured that every document was signed in and signed out, clearly marking the paper trail. While such a system is harder to maintain in the digital age, Danneskiold believes it is desirable.
Clear rules are what people look for.
But critics say the rules are strangling scientists. It's not that they're gong back to the situation in the early '90s. They're getting much stricter than that. With morale so low and fears running high, some of the most talented weapons designers might decide to bail out of government work. I think many members of Congress and others are prone to forget that security is a means and not an end in itself.