3 ms·

If one is responsible for ensuring security, they won't be very effective unless they realize malicious actors masquerading as the incompetent exist and are act

If one is responsible for ensuring security, they won't be very effective unless they realize malicious actors masquerading as the incompetent exist and are active.

SahAssar 7y ago
If I am working on security critical software I don't try to determine the intent of anyone at all, everyone is assumed malicious and their code/actions reviewed as such. My question was in a more general sense, do you assume that all mistakes are done on purpose to conceal some sort of plot?
- droithomme 7y ago
  > everyone is assumed malicious and their code/actions reviewed as such. Yes we are in agreement. > in a more general sense, do you assume that all mistakes are done on purpose to conceal some sort of plot? Obviously not and no one is claiming that. The extremes of never assuming malice and never assuming incompetence are ... extremes. Always starting with a presumption of innocence is said to be a useful premise for a criminal justice system. And always starting with a presumption of malice is a useful premise for security oversight. Not just code but other things like Secret Service details and plane boarding. It's assumed that boxcutter is for hijacking, so you have to give it up. It's presumed that bottle of water is some sort of chemical to be used in making a bomb, so you have to give it up. It's presumed that baby is a secret bomb, so the baby is going to be scanned and inspected. An unrecognized wellwisher rapidly approaching the President on stage at an event is presumed to be an assassin and will be tackled. A car of lost people looking for a wedding location which is approaching a US security checkpoint in Iraq or Afghanistan without slowing down will be machine gunned. A suspicious man, under the influence, who is staggering along down the center of the road in Baltimore who does not follow orders to stop and get on the ground and who instead reaches into his pocket for his id, cell phone, or breath mints, will be shot dead. Malice is the default assumption in a wide variety of security contexts.

If one is responsible for ensuring security, they won't be very effective unless they realize malicious actors masquerading as the incompetent exist and are active.

SahAssar 7y ago

If I am working on security critical software I don't try to determine the intent of anyone at all, everyone is assumed malicious and their code/actions reviewed as such. My question was in a more general sense, do you assume that all mistakes are done on purpose to conceal some sort of plot?

droithomme 7y ago
> everyone is assumed malicious and their code/actions reviewed as such. Yes we are in agreement. > in a more general sense, do you assume that all mistakes are done on purpose to conceal some sort of plot? Obviously not and no one is claiming that. The extremes of never assuming malice and never assuming incompetence are ... extremes. Always starting with a presumption of innocence is said to be a useful premise for a criminal justice system. And always starting with a presumption of malice is a useful premise for security oversight. Not just code but other things like Secret Service details and plane boarding. It's assumed that boxcutter is for hijacking, so you have to give it up. It's presumed that bottle of water is some sort of chemical to be used in making a bomb, so you have to give it up. It's presumed that baby is a secret bomb, so the baby is going to be scanned and inspected. An unrecognized wellwisher rapidly approaching the President on stage at an event is presumed to be an assassin and will be tackled. A car of lost people looking for a wedding location which is approaching a US security checkpoint in Iraq or Afghanistan without slowing down will be machine gunned. A suspicious man, under the influence, who is staggering along down the center of the road in Baltimore who does not follow orders to stop and get on the ground and who instead reaches into his pocket for his id, cell phone, or breath mints, will be shot dead. Malice is the default assumption in a wide variety of security contexts.