11 ms·

Then do we have IT code? Pun not intended.

by eunos 6y ago

throwaway894345 6y ago
Not sure about Germany, but in the US we have HIPAA which sets security standards (physical and electronic) that everyone in the healthcare industry must meet.
- Jtsummers 6y ago
  A lot of times these standards can be satisfied by relatively simple mechanisms like access control lists which prevent legitimate users from performing illegitimate actions (like a nurse or doctor shouldn't be able to pull up any patient record) paired with extra-technological controls like stating that only the listed non-medical personnel can access a particular patient's records (like adding your spouse or parents as valid recipients of test results and health status information). These do nothing to actually ensure the security of the system with regard to external actors. Additionally, you can often satisfy these things with policy statements rather than technological solutions. A weekly review of record access reports may satisfy in some cases, without needing to implement an ACL mechanism.
- AdmiralAsshat 6y ago
  People generally don't die as a result of failure to meet HIPAA standards, though. To boot, HIPAA covers security standards for the protection of PII--it doesn't cover security standards for network intrusion.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    Preventing network intrusion seems pretty critical to protect PII.
    - slowmovintarget 6y ago
      Someone can be on the network and fail to crack encrypted data and you'd be in compliance. HIPAA is only about information leaks, not about operational health.
Jtsummers 6y ago
No, not in the general sense. Only for specific kinds of data/applications (mostly centered around securing PII, health data, and the like). But the general IT infrastructure has no foundational standard we require people to achieve. And after about 60 years of IT, I don't know that we ever will. Efforts to certify systems/processes are often bogus (participate in a CMMI appraisal for a good example of this). Legitimate efforts to certify them are drowned out by the charlatans. And very few in the IT industry would desire personal certifications along the lines of PEs. Either they don't want the legal and financial liability, or they truly believe there's no value in it.
- FpUser 6y ago
  Except for very specific areas (security of vital systems in general) I believe the ability of Subject A to deliver service (including making software) to a Subject B should be strictly a business between consenting adults (bar tax reporting). We are supposed to be a "free" world.
  - Jtsummers 6y ago
    I can mostly agree with this sentiment, but care has to be taken when the system involves people who aren't party to the design decisions, but whose information is stored within the system.
Jon_Lowtek 6y ago
Yes Germany has both general IT guidelines and specific codes for hospitals. Also high levels of IT security are required by law for hospitals. And those standards, guidelines and analysis of industry sector typical problems are made publicly available by a government agency funded with tax money. However: Despite a law being in place since 2015 many hospitals are still underdeveloped when it comes to IT and IT security in particular.
- linuxftw 6y ago
  Some places, the 'code' is merely a tool for businesses or other organizations to avoid liability. "We met all the standards, we shouldn't be accountable." If the brakes go out on your care, and you smash into a building, even though it was recently serviced to whatever 'standards' are you liable? Yes. And then it will be up to you to pursue the manufacturer of the car, who will claim they met all standards, so they're not liable. See how it works?
  - Majromax 6y ago
    > Some places, the 'code' is merely a tool for businesses or other organizations to avoid liability. And that's important. You have to have some place to draw the line between "we did nothing and we're all out of ideas" and "what do you mean you didn't write your own operating system from scratch and hire fifteen security experts to continuously analyze it for un-patched zero-day exploits?" That's where industry standard "best practices" come in. Once some sort of standard is issued (by regulation) or accepted (by industry), it becomes the thing that a Reasonable Person does. Meeting that standard is then usually sufficient to avoid charges of (or additional liability for) negligence. > If the brakes go out on your car, and you smash into a building In this case, you're liable because you carry strict liability for your actions as a driver. However, proof that you've kept the car in working order would be sufficient to escape any criminal charges (dangerous operation of a vehicle, for example)
  - Jon_Lowtek 6y ago
    I would need to give you a very deep dive into how europa and germany especially handle this so you can understand it ... I often forget how different the way people think about regulations is in the USA. On the surface: There is a joint initiative of the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) and the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) which work with domain experts to define the abstract standards for critical infrastructure. There are more specialized sets where the German Hospital Federation (DKGeV) has more influence in how to make it happen for hospitals in particular. The whole regulation is set up to focus on continuous improvement, risk management, escalation processes, investigation of breaches and the like. It is related to ISO27001, but goes beyond that. Maybe comparing it to MilSpec makes it understandable to citizens of the USA: we want our hospitals IT infrastructure to be like the navy wants its warships: made out of steel, with redundant systems and sane compartmentalization so it can withstand most attacks. And we are willing to invest billions of tax money to get our existing hospitals up to these standards, because many are like viking longboats: they stay afloat and cure disease, but they are not protected against torpedoes. A hospital looses most of its infrastructure to a some ransomware? There is an investigation by the supervisory body into the technical and organizational details of the specific security incident and they really don't care about certifications printed by some private company that claims to have audited the hospital. The expected result is a "how this hospital intents to prevent this type of incident in the future" document. These standards are not about certifications of industry sector mediocrity waved around to shift blame and win liability cases in court. Also I don't think liability cases work that way over here, but i am not a lawyer.
heavyset_go 6y ago
We have best practices, laws like HIPAA and standards like PCI DSS.

Then do we have IT code? Pun not intended.

by eunos 6y ago

Then do we have IT code? Pun not intended.

Not sure about Germany, but in the US we have HIPAA which sets security standards (physical and electronic) that everyone in the healthcare industry must meet.

Jtsummers 6y ago
A lot of times these standards can be satisfied by relatively simple mechanisms like access control lists which prevent legitimate users from performing illegitimate actions (like a nurse or doctor shouldn't be able to pull up any patient record) paired with extra-technological controls like stating that only the listed non-medical personnel can access a particular patient's records (like adding your spouse or parents as valid recipients of test results and health status information). These do nothing to actually ensure the security of the system with regard to external actors. Additionally, you can often satisfy these things with policy statements rather than technological solutions. A weekly review of record access reports may satisfy in some cases, without needing to implement an ACL mechanism.
AdmiralAsshat 6y ago
People generally don't die as a result of failure to meet HIPAA standards, though. To boot, HIPAA covers security standards for the protection of PII--it doesn't cover security standards for network intrusion.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  Preventing network intrusion seems pretty critical to protect PII.
  - slowmovintarget 6y ago
    Someone can be on the network and fail to crack encrypted data and you'd be in compliance. HIPAA is only about information leaks, not about operational health.

Jtsummers 6y ago

No, not in the general sense. Only for specific kinds of data/applications (mostly centered around securing PII, health data, and the like). But the general IT infrastructure has no foundational standard we require people to achieve. And after about 60 years of IT, I don't know that we ever will. Efforts to certify systems/processes are often bogus (participate in a CMMI appraisal for a good example of this). Legitimate efforts to certify them are drowned out by the charlatans. And very few in the IT industry would desire personal certifications along the lines of PEs. Either they don't want the legal and financial liability, or they truly believe there's no value in it.

FpUser 6y ago
Except for very specific areas (security of vital systems in general) I believe the ability of Subject A to deliver service (including making software) to a Subject B should be strictly a business between consenting adults (bar tax reporting). We are supposed to be a "free" world.
- Jtsummers 6y ago
  I can mostly agree with this sentiment, but care has to be taken when the system involves people who aren't party to the design decisions, but whose information is stored within the system.

Jon_Lowtek 6y ago

Yes Germany has both general IT guidelines and specific codes for hospitals. Also high levels of IT security are required by law for hospitals. And those standards, guidelines and analysis of industry sector typical problems are made publicly available by a government agency funded with tax money. However: Despite a law being in place since 2015 many hospitals are still underdeveloped when it comes to IT and IT security in particular.

linuxftw 6y ago
Some places, the 'code' is merely a tool for businesses or other organizations to avoid liability. "We met all the standards, we shouldn't be accountable." If the brakes go out on your care, and you smash into a building, even though it was recently serviced to whatever 'standards' are you liable? Yes. And then it will be up to you to pursue the manufacturer of the car, who will claim they met all standards, so they're not liable. See how it works?
- Majromax 6y ago
  > Some places, the 'code' is merely a tool for businesses or other organizations to avoid liability. And that's important. You have to have some place to draw the line between "we did nothing and we're all out of ideas" and "what do you mean you didn't write your own operating system from scratch and hire fifteen security experts to continuously analyze it for un-patched zero-day exploits?" That's where industry standard "best practices" come in. Once some sort of standard is issued (by regulation) or accepted (by industry), it becomes the thing that a Reasonable Person does. Meeting that standard is then usually sufficient to avoid charges of (or additional liability for) negligence. > If the brakes go out on your car, and you smash into a building In this case, you're liable because you carry strict liability for your actions as a driver. However, proof that you've kept the car in working order would be sufficient to escape any criminal charges (dangerous operation of a vehicle, for example)
- Jon_Lowtek 6y ago
  I would need to give you a very deep dive into how europa and germany especially handle this so you can understand it ... I often forget how different the way people think about regulations is in the USA. On the surface: There is a joint initiative of the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) and the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) which work with domain experts to define the abstract standards for critical infrastructure. There are more specialized sets where the German Hospital Federation (DKGeV) has more influence in how to make it happen for hospitals in particular. The whole regulation is set up to focus on continuous improvement, risk management, escalation processes, investigation of breaches and the like. It is related to ISO27001, but goes beyond that. Maybe comparing it to MilSpec makes it understandable to citizens of the USA: we want our hospitals IT infrastructure to be like the navy wants its warships: made out of steel, with redundant systems and sane compartmentalization so it can withstand most attacks. And we are willing to invest billions of tax money to get our existing hospitals up to these standards, because many are like viking longboats: they stay afloat and cure disease, but they are not protected against torpedoes. A hospital looses most of its infrastructure to a some ransomware? There is an investigation by the supervisory body into the technical and organizational details of the specific security incident and they really don't care about certifications printed by some private company that claims to have audited the hospital. The expected result is a "how this hospital intents to prevent this type of incident in the future" document. These standards are not about certifications of industry sector mediocrity waved around to shift blame and win liability cases in court. Also I don't think liability cases work that way over here, but i am not a lawyer.

heavyset_go 6y ago

We have best practices, laws like HIPAA and standards like PCI DSS.