>You need only one marginally competent one to wreck your entire platform. Yes exactly. Ultimately security is deeply involved with threat modeling. It is like

>You need only one marginally competent one to wreck your entire platform. Yes exactly. Ultimately security is deeply involved with threat modeling. It is likely that the author's boss did not prioritize her pet security issues because they were a low risk in the threat model. >How can you possibly believe that a bunch of white supremacists are not a threat? Domain expertise. Frankly I am somewhat surprised that people with what is apparent to be a television soap opera level of understanding of american dissident activity make public posts on the topic with the confidence they do on here. Not you, of course, but others. Unfortunately, the most believable interpretation of this story is very boring office politics: Our author, having failed to make a case to her boss, drummed up some internet post in an attempt to get her way. We've all known people like this... they have varying amounts of self-awareness. It is characteristic of such actors to manufacture exactly the sort of attack they imagine to be the most relevant. This is likely to be such a case. What gives her away is that this is some fantastical story that makes sense only in pop culture: if there is even one WS cyber attack on an american federal platform for every 10,000 chinese attacks I will eat my hat and livestream it. These are simply not people with competence in the field of cyber security.