Kurt,

If someone wants your data, they WILL get it.  It's not a matter of IF, it's
a matter of WHEN.  People WANT the governments data, without absolute
sneaker net, it is nearly IMPOSSIBLE to protect completely.  There will
always be a hole somewhere no matter how secure the environment is.

It's all a matter of risk and the cost to mitigate the risk. There are
fundamentally secure ways to accomplish what has been asked.  Is it a
perfect solution?  Maybe not, but it is doable.

You are a talented IT professional, but I think you may be living in the IT
fantasy land...

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 8:41 PM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 18:11, Ken Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Then you should turn of all your computers, encase them in concrete, and
> > launch them into outer space - and into the Sun. That is the best way of
> > stopping anyone compromising one of your machines.
>
> Got to love the straw man argument.
>
> > Having a non-domain joined SQL Server in your DMZ is far less secure than
> that.
>
> Than what? Launching it into the sun? You conveniently ignore that I
> said "when you know there are better ways", and the
>
> > Hint: go and read some books on security first. *All* security is risk
> mitigation.
> > For example: that's why we still have passwords that are only "x"
> characters long,
> > rather than "x + 1" (where x is any number less than infinity).
>
> I have read security books, and keep up with Full Disclosure, FW
> Wizards and several other lists, as well as monitoring isc.sans.org.
>
> And you exaggerate again. We have passwords that are 'x' characters
> long (I tend to use 20+ character passphrases myself) because the
> effort to crack them is, so far, infeasible, due to the lack of
> rainbow tables of the size necessary to do so, and the lack of time to
> brute force them before I change them. If firms (such as my own work,
> I'll admit) are so foolish as to ignore this limit, then they will
> likely suffer for it, and deserve to do so.
>
> > Everything in security is about:
> > a) analysing what risks you face,
> > b) working out what the likelihood of it eventuating
> > c) working out the cost of the likelihood eventuating
> > d) working out the cost of making the risk go away
> > e) working out whether it's cost effective to implement (d) given
> (a)(b)(c)
>
> It's a b) that the risk mitigation wizards fail. Spectacularly. IMHO,
> "risk mitigation" is a mantra that has gone way too far, in the
> relentless pursuit of cost and effort savings. The above
> recommendation to turn a firewall into a safe passage for intruders is
> a prime example.
>
> > That is why a national government has a far more secure, cumbersome
> network
> > than your average business. Because the risks are different.
>
> Oh, yeah - that's worked out well, hasn't it? I believe you have that
> problem by the wrong end of the stick. National government networks
> are more cumbersome, and not more secure, in the main. That's because
> they're, wait for it, run by bureaucrats. They danced the risk
> mitigation dance, and we got wikileaks, infected thumb drives, virus
> infestations on supposedly secure networks, and all manner of
> silliness.
>
> > That why we don't all blithely implement the same way of doing things.
> Because doing
> > things *costs* money (whether that be products, convenience, productivity
> etc)
>
> And doing them intelligently costs less money than doing them stupidly.
>
> Kurt
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to [email protected]
with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin

Reply via email to