The House Select Committee on Benghazi convened its second hearing Wednesday focusing on the security of U.S. embassies and other high-risk diplomatic posts. Clearly, security was grossly inadequate in Benghazi, Libya, where four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador, lost their lives in a terrorist attack.

The hearing comes as several organizations have revealed persistent problems with the State Department’s security protocols for its posts as U.S. diplomats today operate in more and more far-flung and unstable environments. According to the Wall Street Journal, an internal State Department report of diplomatic security 2012 to 2013 revealed that State’s inspector general had found security gaps in five recently added high-risk posts, including Benghazi.

Further, according to documents obtained by Judicial Watch, the Blue Mountain Group, the British contractor hired by the State Department to protect the Benghazi consular compound, did not have the requisite security license and was about to have its contract terminated by the State Department. BMG was advised by a State Department official to avoid responding to media inquiries when the Benghazi attack went down.

According to the written testimony to the Committee by State Department Inspector General Steve Linick, his office has found and continues to find shortcomings in the way State deals with diplomatic security. One is that the Office of Diplomatic Security can make recommendations, but the Office of Building Operations has the budget and makes its own plans. There is a lack of coordination between the two.

There also is a persistent disconnect between the security requirements formulated in Washington and the logistical demands on the ground at postings. And the system of waivers that allows officials to depart from security specifications for buildings (like distance to the road and height of perimeter walls) is broken. The IG found that records of waivers were missing or not obtained because staff simply did not know they were mandatory. By law, only the secretary of state can issue a waiver, a fact apparently not known or disregarded by Hillary Clinton in Benghazi.

Now, State has made some advances in implementing recommendations by the IG and by the Accountability Review Board in the wake of Benghazi. Linick says,

Although a number of our recommendations related to the Special Review remain unresolved, OIG has found evidence that the Department has made progress in addressing some security concerns.

For example, a lack of shared responsibility between the Office of Diplomatic Security and State’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs was a contributing factor to the lack of security in Benghazi. Now the two work together.

A September 2014 inspection report on the High Threat Programs Directorate within Diplomatic Security, found that HTP staff has become more effectively integrated into State’s regional and functional bureaus.

In addition, the State Department has produced a detailed plan to strengthen security at high-risk, high-threat posts, which includes enhanced training of more than 1,000 diplomatic security special agents.

As the State Department moves slowly to change its procedures, recommendations made by ARB’s (and there have been 12 of them) tend to become repetitive as the same problems surface again and again in embassy security.

It would be good news if the tenacity of Chairman Trey Gowdy , R-S.C., and the Select Committee on Benghazi could help speed that process along. The world is not becoming any less dangerous for our diplomats.