- There is no reason why sensitive personal data should be accessible on each and every of your thousands of computers. And there is no reason why all your clients should look the same and have the same level of security. Introducing different security levels in your infrastructure ( e.g. having "more secure zones") should be the approach here, not complaining that encrypting all and every kit costs so much..
Getting caught, punished, blamed and thrown in jail *should* be part of that cost/benefit analysis. - So I just hope that we'll see some real stiff penalties soon.
- Stefan
If you look at introducing different security levels in your infrastructure, you'll see that
On 7/5/06, Q-Ball <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Security is simply a cost/benefit excercise at the end of the day. No one implements security just to feel better about themselves.On 7/5/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 00:25:15 EDT, Stack Smasher said:
> Like I said, shareholder value and profit plays a huge role in people
> getting off their ass and doing something to help the general public,
> seeing as how you have mostly worked at a university you don't have an
> executive board screaming at you
Universities have their equivalent of executive boards, trust me.
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
