3 ms·
This answer is too flip. In corporate america, you might be able to use a personal e-mail as a stop-gap measure but not as a primary communication. Not in any
by 001sky 12y ago
This answer is too flip. In corporate america, you might be able to use a personal e-mail as a stop-gap measure but not as a primary communication. Not in any fortune 50 or whatevr company with compliance and security infrastructure. This is something that has changed drastically in the past 10 years.
Most corporate hardware should be presumed "insecure" from the perspective of personal communication, and similarly so shoud any account that is used to co-mingle work and personal communication.
In other words, it is with great risk[1] that you don't use company hardware. Unless you have duplicate systems, of course. And if you have a duplicate system that you pay for in lieu of the company, only to for the purpose of subverting company policy, you have an ethics problem.
If that makes sense.
In any event, the technical issues here about how this was setup are legitimately interesting. It might very well be that the NSA/secret service or whomever set up this system to very secure indeed. I think the jury is out on that, frankly, and I'm not sure I would jump to the conclusion that SOS would be so wreckless as to not have her system vetted. (Or that the secret service or NSA or whomever would be so wreckless to not do it for them). Obviously it was a very carefully considered and pre-meditated decision to set up this system.
But then again people do stupid stuff all the time.
[1] To your personal life and privacy, not to the corporations per-se.
- parasubvert 12y ago"In corporate america, you might be able to use a personal e-mail as a stop-gap measure but not as a primary communication. Not in any fortune 50 or whatevr company with compliance and security infrastructure. This is something that has changed drastically in the past 10 years." Yes ... towards things like Google Mail for Corporations. If you make your corporate email better than your personal email, people will use it. If not, they just won't, if they have enough political power within the organization. I speak from close exposure to white glove CxO level IT service where we do everything from ensure the biometric reader on the CEO's laptop works, to helping wire the CFO's home theatre system, getting the board chairman's vacation photos printed, and setting up all their personal devices. If these sorts of folks don't like a system, they won't use it. They chucked the Blackberry for an iPhone. One of the reasons I've seen biometrics on a laptop is that a particular leader refused to remember a password longer than 4 digits. That alone made them prefer the corporate Lenovo vs. their personal Macbook Air. "Most corporate hardware should be presumed "insecure" from the perspective of personal communication, and similarly so shoud any account that is used to co-mingle work and personal communication." Bring Your Own Device is becoming popular. Every company I've worked for in the past 8 years (2/3 in the Fortune 100) allows BYOD in some form for executives, where they mix their personal and corporate communication. And sometimes for all employees. The latest thinking in corporate security is not to lock down devices but rather to assume that ALL devices are vulnerable, with no special status for corporate assets. The solution there is to isolate in depth at the service level, with appropriate policy and device management installed for enforcing minimum standards and for emergency remote wipe. Modern apps - email, HR, reporting, order management, etc. are on the Internet, not behind the firewall... unless there's a need for NAT. Legacy can be accessed through VDI. I admit the future here is not evenly distributed yet. But this is the trend that I see. "In other words, it is with great risk[1] that you don't use company hardware. Unless you have duplicate systems, of course. And if you have a duplicate system that you pay for in lieu of the company, only to for the purpose of subverting company policy, you have an ethics problem." I would say corporate IT has a usability problem.