d News. "But what's so troubling about the Army's regulation is that it treats the handing off of unclassified, so-called 'critical' and 'sensitive' data as almost as serious a matter."

The regulation, AR-530-1, was revised March 20 and directs Army personnel to "prevent disclosure of critical and sensitive information in any public domain to include but not limited to the World Wide Web, open source publications and the media," and "consult with their immediate supervisor and their OPSEC officer for an OPSEC review prior to publishing or posting information in a public forum."

Those forums includes letters, résumés, articles for publication, e- mail, blog postings and discussions on online message boards, the regulation states.

Army officials say the new regulation maintains the troops' abilities to post their writings and the service's need for operational security.

The Army "welcomes blogging and we always have," said Paul Boyce, an Army spokesman.

"We've tried to strike an extremely careful balance with the blogging community so they can continue to do what they want to do and need to do," he said.

The Army doesn't keep track of how many soldiers have blogs, Boyce said, adding that "we're not going to try and track a blog database or anything like that."

Milblogging.com, a Web site that tracks military blogs, on May 4 had 1,709 military blogs from 30 countries and 3,240 registered members.

Since July 2005, soldiers, who receive annual OPSEC awareness briefings, have been asked to register their blogs with their chain of command, and they receive briefings on what they can and can not post online, Boyce said. The blogs could be monitored, but "it's basically a trust system," he said.

"For the most part we've been doing this now for almost three years and everyone's been extremely cooperative," he said. "No one wants to see anyone get hurt, or worse, get killed."

As for e-mail, it would be impossible to monitor all the e-mails that are sent from theater, Boyce said.

"Commanders have a responsibility to inform their soldiers of critical information for their unit and how to protect it," Boyce said. "Once soldiers and Army personnel are informed, the Army trusts that they will protect that information to ensure the safety of themselves and other Army personnel."

The Army tells its soldiers to "be mindful of what you're saying and what you're doing," Boyce said.

The revised regulation also states that Army personnel should "consider handling attempts by unauthorized personnel to solicit critical information or sensitive information as a Subversion and Espionage Directed Against the U.S. Army (SAEDA) incident."

One Army blogger expressed mixed feeling about the updated regulation.

"Overall it's very, very chilling, but the other way of looking at it is nothing has changed except the language has changed in the regulation, in that it's more specific," said Jason Hartley, a sergeant in the New York National Guard who turned his blog into a book called "Just Another Soldier."

"The soldier part of me is like, 'OK, commanders could always do this,'" he said. "The blogger side of me is like, 'Wow, this is scary.'"

Hartley, 33, kept a blog while he was in Iraq in 2004. His blogging led to a demotion from E-5 to E-4.

"My argument's always been that our commander didn't like my sense of humor," Hartley said. "On paper the reason was I was violating OPSEC. I was blogging during a time when there were zero guidelines."

Hartley recently was promoted to E-5 again, and he doesn't update his blog as much anymore.

"The blogging community for the most part is heavily conservative and family-based. They're cheerleaders rather than detractors," Hartley said. "What I think is the most interesting is that people who're pro- Army, pro-Iraq, they're pissed off. Guys like me will always be upset when we're not allowed to write, but when the cheerleaders are pissed off, it's pretty significant."

It would be unwise to dismiss the updated regulation, Hartley said.

"It still has a potential to be very chilling," he said.

Other revisions to AR 530-1 include:

Designating "For Official Use Only" as the standard marking for all unclassified products that meet one or more of the exemptions for the Freedom of Information Act, and which if released to the public could cause harm to Army operations or personnel.

Emphasizing punitive measures for violations of specific directives from commanders and leaders to protect critical and sensitive information.

Addressing recent technology concerns such as e-mail and blogs.

In a Powerpoint briefing by the Army's 1st Information Operations Command at Fort Belvoir, Va., titled "OPSEC in the Blogosphere," one slide lists "media" as a nontraditional domestic threat, along with "drug cartel."

The 1st IO Command is part of the Army's Intelligence and Support Command.

The Army does not consider the media a threat, Boyce said. Instead, the slide was referring to information within the media that could be a potential threat, he said.

"We're trying to avoid getting our soldiers killed and when possible frustrate the enemy," he said.

American news outlets have been very responsible in working with the Army about OPSEC, Boyce said.

"They also do not want to cause harm to our soldiers," he said.

The bottom line is, people follow very closely any updates to Army regulations on topics such as OPSEC, Boyce said.

"We take OPSEC very seriously but we caution people not to over-read the changes," he said.

-------