I have worked at the armed forces and have been granted, signed and photographed for use and handling of secret material within the forces. I am wondering whether it's appropriate to mention I handled such information on my resume, of course without disclosing anything about the context of any confidential or secret information.

  • 7
    Isn't that implied by mentioning your active security clearance level? – Peter M Jun 1 at 21:20
  • Thanks for the comment. I'm not from the States but I think I understand what you mean. – Vincent Jun 1 at 21:22
  • 4
    @Vincent, This answer will completely depend on the country you're located in and what their policies are. There is usually a very strict protocol to follow for these kinds of things. But please don't tell us which country this is about. Go to the website of your armed forces, and if you can't find the answer to that question on their website, call them directly, and ask for their guidance of what you're allowed to say on your resume. – Stephan Branczyk Jun 1 at 21:37
  • 1
    Stephan's comment is about as good an answer as you're going to get. I'll add a bit of context for others though. In the USA, you might list your clearance in your resume, but not most other details. (NSA Guidance tinyurl.com/5x97huzy) Of course, this gets more complicated if you are working with a foreign military. For example, I might assume the US military in Afghanistan will have reason to share some classified data with the locals. Those locals would be well advised to check with both their own local authority as well as their US military contacts for protocol on this. – Elros Jun 1 at 21:47
  • 2
    I am wondering whether it's appropriate to mention I handled such information on my resume - Is it relevant to the jobs you're applying for? – joeqwerty Jun 1 at 22:41

I would not write "I worked with secrets" on the CV

If your future job requires certification, background checks, or general ability to work with confidential/secrete materials, then you will be asked whether you satisfy these requirements (or the company will do its due diligence to check)

If that doesn't matter, you will not get better job offer because you write that you worked with secrets. If anything, I would be worried that you want to brag about such access

  • I absolutely agree, but that raises the question, what can I actually write I worked with? – Vincent Jun 1 at 21:42
  • 1
    @Vincent how do you mean "what can I write I worked with?" Considering the gist of my comment the answer seems to be nothing, for heaven's sake? – Levente Jun 1 at 22:00
  • 1
    It does not raise the question. The thing of value is your ability to be granted clearance, not your handling of secrets. – Corey Jun 2 at 2:55
  • @Corey thats what I mean. Don't see how including "Clearance: ---" next to the work description can do any harm. – Vincent Jun 2 at 12:44
  • 2
    @Vincent I don't see how that could be what you mean. Your question is specifically about whether it is appropriate for you to mention the handling of secret information on your CV. That is very different from listing your clearance. A clearance does not even imply the handling of secrets, it acts as the authorization to do so. Your comments do not match your OP or its title, and your follow-ups such as what can I actually write I worked with? give the impression that you really want to talk about the secrets you've handled. – Corey Jun 3 at 0:55

Put your current clearance level on your resume

The fact that you still have it means you've handled the secrets safely, or at least didn't do something so egregious that you lost it. Getting a clearance is a multi-month process, so already having one can really help a job search.

Don't mention secrets, let the clearance imply that. Be ready to answer basic questions about how to handle data at different clearance levels in an interview.


Yes. It is worth a small supporting clause under a project or job function you list otherwise, provided your prospective employer cares at all about maintaining sensitive information. Some companies have been harmed by mistreatment of sensitive information by employees, so this can be a small factor in your favor. Otherwise it's filler.

For example, if you apply as a project manager to Apple (cares about product secrecy), you could write, "lead this; delivered that; strictly protected confidential information."


No it's just a clearance that comes with a position so that you can do your tasks, I have a couple of them. It's not useful outside of a niche set of jobs and you lose it when you leave the job.

If it's an industrywide clearance of some sort then it would be worth putting in. Otherwise it just looks like you're struggling to find filler material.

  • The usefulness depends a lot on the location you are working in. There are more jobs just up the road from me than I can poke a stick at, that I can't apply for, because to do require obtaining a security clearance (DoD, aerospace, nuclear, data science etc). There's a large amount of non-niche jobs within those areas. – Peter M Jun 1 at 22:18
  • @PeterM yeah, that's why I said industry wide clearances. But OP would have mentioned that. But job specific clearances are what they hand out so you can get past security to the server room with minimum fuss and work on secure systems and files, pretty low level and generic. You don't need to be in the army to have one issued, airport janitors have them – Kilisi Jun 1 at 22:20
  • @Kilisi I'm certain there's a difference between a janitor's clearance and in the military. Don't see how including "Clearance: ---" next to the work description can do any harm – Vincent Jun 2 at 12:45
  • @Vincent you should compose an answer based on that, I have several different clearances, none of them worth anything outside the specific job, they're just necessary for access and come with the job. – Kilisi Jun 2 at 13:14

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .