3 ms·

If one single judge would not give them a free pass, I think we would see a sea change in how computer security is handled across the industry. Put one CEO in

If one single judge would not give them a free pass, I think we would see a sea change in how computer security is handled across the industry. Put one CEO in prison for criminal negligence after a breach when it is found that they hired cheap, inexperienced, tiny staffs, overloaded them with work, and then ignored absolutely every warning they gave about insecure practices. Every company does this. It's how IT works in the modern world. Hire "engineers" as inexperienced and cheap as possible, give an MBA all the actual say in scheduling and release dates, and constantly complain about the technology that makes their business possible is too expensive. It's amazing the effect a CEO locked in a cage for a few years like an animal has on the population of CEOs as a whole. Treat digital infrastructure like we treat real infrastructure. If people built bridges the way we build software infrastructure, rafts of executives would be rotting in prison.

decebalus1 9y ago
> It's amazing the effect a CEO locked in a cage for a few years like an animal has on the population of CEOs as a whole. Treat digital infrastructure like we treat real infrastructure. If people built bridges the way we build software infrastructure, rafts of executives would be rotting in prison. Never going to happen. Especially in the current 'business friendly' administration. This [1] book does a great job at explaining why. I don't think we'll see a CEO behind bars for anything white-collar in our generation. Sadly. Judges and prosecutors are political animals too, you know. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Chickenshit-Club-Department-Prosecute-Executives/dp/1501121367 https://www.amazon.com/Chickenshit-Club-Department-Prosecute...
zdragnar 9y ago
Honest question here- why is it that rage is always directed at the CEO? I mean, there's usually a CTO and / or a COO, plus a director and some other levels of management who actually make the decisions that lead to these scenarios.
- Khaine 9y ago
  Because they are ultimately in charge.
- stijnstijn 9y ago
  I'm not sure whether I really agree with the singular focus on the CEO or C*O, but often one of the reasons that is given for their large paychecks is that they carry a lot of responsibilities. Following that, it would seem prudent to actually hold them responsible when something goes wrong, especially something with as much impact as a large-scale data breach.
  - zdragnar 9y ago
    Why would we hold them responsible for something going wrong if what went wrong wasn't their responsibility? I've known a few CEOs (not personally) and not one of them was in charge of anyone who had these types of responsibilities, directly or indirectly. Plenty of C-level and director types have large paychecks. To randomly place blame because of that would only make matters worse. Those responsible would have a convenient scapegoat, and CEOs would just demand higher salaries as compensation for taking on risks outside of their control. Honestly, the whole "get the CEO" movement has always smacked of intellectual dishonesty to me, as though catharsis were in any way a decent value to base public policy on.

decebalus1 9y ago

> It's amazing the effect a CEO locked in a cage for a few years like an animal has on the population of CEOs as a whole. Treat digital infrastructure like we treat real infrastructure. If people built bridges the way we build software infrastructure, rafts of executives would be rotting in prison. Never going to happen. Especially in the current 'business friendly' administration. This [1] book does a great job at explaining why. I don't think we'll see a CEO behind bars for anything white-collar in our generation. Sadly. Judges and prosecutors are political animals too, you know. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Chickenshit-Club-Department-Prosecute-Executives/dp/1501121367 https://www.amazon.com/Chickenshit-Club-Department-Prosecute...

zdragnar 9y ago

Honest question here- why is it that rage is always directed at the CEO? I mean, there's usually a CTO and / or a COO, plus a director and some other levels of management who actually make the decisions that lead to these scenarios.

Khaine 9y ago
Because they are ultimately in charge.
stijnstijn 9y ago
I'm not sure whether I really agree with the singular focus on the CEO or C*O, but often one of the reasons that is given for their large paychecks is that they carry a lot of responsibilities. Following that, it would seem prudent to actually hold them responsible when something goes wrong, especially something with as much impact as a large-scale data breach.
- zdragnar 9y ago
  Why would we hold them responsible for something going wrong if what went wrong wasn't their responsibility? I've known a few CEOs (not personally) and not one of them was in charge of anyone who had these types of responsibilities, directly or indirectly. Plenty of C-level and director types have large paychecks. To randomly place blame because of that would only make matters worse. Those responsible would have a convenient scapegoat, and CEOs would just demand higher salaries as compensation for taking on risks outside of their control. Honestly, the whole "get the CEO" movement has always smacked of intellectual dishonesty to me, as though catharsis were in any way a decent value to base public policy on.