4 ms·
The company that runs it for the government, or the company who owns it for the government? If the government owns the infrastructure, but outsources the day-t
by AndrewDucker 9mo ago
The company that runs it for the government, or the company who owns it for the government?
If the government owns the infrastructure, but outsources the day-to-day running to a company that's one thing. But if the infrastructure is owned by the third party then that's a lot harder to deal with.
- bossyTeacher 9mo ago> If the government owns the infrastructure, but outsources the day-to-day running to a company that's one thing This is still very problematic. To be honest, even using foreign hardware or propietary software is problematic. But you should reduce dependence as much as possible because it is a huge vector that should the foreign government decide to turn on you openly or secretly, it could bring you down before you have a chance to detect what is happening. I believe wars between developed countries will operate at this level (i.e. by targeting foreign dependency chains whether it be national systems for id or simply cutting undersea cables)
- AndrewDucker 9mo agoI agree that it's still problematic. But you can recover from that by hiring your own staff and slowly taking over the running of the system. No doubt there would be issues, but it would be doable. Recovering from "Your critical national infrastructure is physically owned by someone else" is much trickier.