3 ms·

Considering the OPM hack under the predecessor provided information on every person with a security clearance, I don't think it is quite fair to blame one as th

Considering the OPM hack under the predecessor provided information on every person with a security clearance, I don't think it is quite fair to blame one as this sadly seems to be par for the course. I'm sure the incoming octogenarian will understand the series of tubes better...

mhh__ 6y ago
When you have the President firing people (Director of DHS Cybersecurity ring any bells?) for not playing his insane games, does the apple fall far from the tree? If you think the president needs to actually "understand" anything subtle like (even physical) security, you are being deliberately obtuse or naive.
- _-david-_ 6y ago
  This hack happened prior to the firing.
- IndPhysiker 6y ago
  It is pretty reasonable to say that managers need to have at least a cursory understanding of the business they are managing. That doesn't mean anyone expects a president to take a direct hand in selection of components for a security infrastructure, but rather have an appreciation that information security is quite serious and put competent managers in place over those decisions. Even a Director level position in any location in government is still rather far removed from the decision process as their purview typically includes HR, budgeting, procurement, regulatory oversight, and somewhere further down the pole is the actual work. That isn't naivete but reality of how this bureaucracy works.
  - loopz 6y ago
    With fear-based toxic culture, nobody reports anything and you get USSR and Chernobyl the series.
ntsplnkv2 6y ago
Good to know the buck doesn't stop at the presidency anymore. Guess it's just a free for all.
- IndPhysiker 6y ago
  Information security is a boondoggle for high levels anywhere as there are no repercussions for failure. Neither CEOs nor high level government officials give it the respect it is due because it is expected and they can all point the blame somewhere else and feel no pain. Compare export control laws that have individual implications that a company cannot cover in the case of a violation, while cyber security breaches have no similar penalty. If a law were made to impose fines of 2-3 times the total compensation package of C-level management for one or more years including unvested stocks and unexercised options, then I'm sure we would see security departments expand rapidly as a CYA. The buck should stop at the top, but without laws to force the issue, it won't.
- randmeerkat 6y ago
  When did it ever stop at the presidency?

mhh__ 6y ago

When you have the President firing people (Director of DHS Cybersecurity ring any bells?) for not playing his insane games, does the apple fall far from the tree? If you think the president needs to actually "understand" anything subtle like (even physical) security, you are being deliberately obtuse or naive.

_-david-_ 6y ago
This hack happened prior to the firing.
IndPhysiker 6y ago
It is pretty reasonable to say that managers need to have at least a cursory understanding of the business they are managing. That doesn't mean anyone expects a president to take a direct hand in selection of components for a security infrastructure, but rather have an appreciation that information security is quite serious and put competent managers in place over those decisions. Even a Director level position in any location in government is still rather far removed from the decision process as their purview typically includes HR, budgeting, procurement, regulatory oversight, and somewhere further down the pole is the actual work. That isn't naivete but reality of how this bureaucracy works.
- loopz 6y ago
  With fear-based toxic culture, nobody reports anything and you get USSR and Chernobyl the series.

ntsplnkv2 6y ago

Good to know the buck doesn't stop at the presidency anymore. Guess it's just a free for all.

IndPhysiker 6y ago
Information security is a boondoggle for high levels anywhere as there are no repercussions for failure. Neither CEOs nor high level government officials give it the respect it is due because it is expected and they can all point the blame somewhere else and feel no pain. Compare export control laws that have individual implications that a company cannot cover in the case of a violation, while cyber security breaches have no similar penalty. If a law were made to impose fines of 2-3 times the total compensation package of C-level management for one or more years including unvested stocks and unexercised options, then I'm sure we would see security departments expand rapidly as a CYA. The buck should stop at the top, but without laws to force the issue, it won't.
randmeerkat 6y ago
When did it ever stop at the presidency?