4 ms·
No, he's saying if you work in a department that has been given the power to oversee security at your organization, then your job is as much to service your cus
by awinder 11y ago
No, he's saying if you work in a department that has been given the power to oversee security at your organization, then your job is as much to service your customers (the other departments) as much as it is to ensure their safety. Trying to use that position as a means to be change-averse or to power-play is just going to ultimately lead to people finding another way.
There's also a real line between ultimately flaunting the rules and "just trying to get your job done" in these kinds situations. Obviously if you're imperiling classified secrets that distinction will not apply to you. But for most other people this is just an item in the toolbox for effecting the change you want to see, lol.
- talmand 11y agoI would hope security's main concern is security, not making people feel happy about their preferences. If a person can show that it is a power-play then those security people are failing at their jobs, which is a different matter. So far I've only seen speculation that this situation was politics.
- awinder 11y agoSo back in the real world, no one's job is ever to go "do the best for the best's sake", outside of maybe academia. That's not how people work together, and as you get into more heavily politicized environments, the more true that is.
- talmand 11y agoAnd we wonder why we see so many companies and government agencies failing at security.
- deong 11y agoThere are a lot of situations in life that end up having come down to "do you want to be right or do you want solve the problem?" If you're a security professional who doesn't spend a fair amount of your energy making your users happy, you're failing at your main job of ensuring security, for exactly the reasons on display here. Security doesn't end when you've sent out the memo outlining your policy.