Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IBM bans USB, SD cards, flash drives and portable devices from every office

theregister.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 202 posts

Re: IBM bans USB, SD cards, flash drives and portable devices from every office

#181

Post by xaldir »

xbryanx wrote: post #26
genericone wrote: post #17

This is common at many semiconductor companies. Not only is it a ban at one specific semiconductor oem I know of, the usb-ports are disabled and the usb-ports on new issue computers are epoxied to prevent trying to use them. Semiconductor technology is one of the areas of global-technological competition which surely benefit from secrecy. For example, several years ago one of the c-level executives at this specific O…

How do you connect a keyboard or mouse?

Now you know why the PS/2 port is still around.

Re: IBM bans USB, SD cards, flash drives and portable devices from every office

#182

Post by d0ugie »

Perhaps fairly inevitable eventual breaches of client data are more forgivable when a given firm can point to efforts such as this as evidence of having tried to keep a lid on leaks, and to elevate confidence that it is less likely to happen.

From what I've seen some firms' internal security practices in general seem more to be about appearances whereas other firms tighten and scrutinize everything as if the company's reputation and survival depended on it.

Re: IBM bans USB, SD cards, flash drives and portable devices from every office

#183

Post by kruczek »

snowwrestler wrote: post #171
fabianhjr wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In economic terms, intellectual property is non-rival, whereas tangible property is rival. As a result, the “piracy” of intellectual property is simply not the same sort of zero-sum game that car theft — or theft of any tangible property — is. And that means that when Hollywood or the U.S. government says that music or movie downloaders are “pirates” or “thieves,” they are indulging in a bit of loose rhetoric. Ther…

This is a popular argument but I think it is wrong because it uses the wrong analogy. I'll illustrate. If I buy a candy bar at the store for $0.99 and then you steal it, now you have it and I don't. I'm out $0.99 of value and you stole $0.99 of value. But what if you steal the candy bar directly from the store? You got $0.99 of value, but the store didn't pay $0.99 for that candy bar; they may have only paid $0.40. W…

This analogy is also wrong, exactly for the reason that IP is not a physical thing that can be taken - it can only be copied.

Yes, by leaving $0.40, I would be stealing $0.59 of foregone revenue, but that is because the shop doesn't have that candy bar anymore and can't sell it. In case of IP, even if I pirate it, you can still sell it to other people.

Of course you probably can't sell it to me anymore and that may be lost revenue, but it depends if I would be actually willing and able to buy that IP otherwise. And of course it may cause more competition to appear, which will negatively affect your business.

Re: IBM bans USB, SD cards, flash drives and portable devices from every office

#184

Post by snowwrestler »

kruczek wrote: post #183
snowwrestler wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a popular argument but I think it is wrong because it uses the wrong analogy. I'll illustrate. If I buy a candy bar at the store for $0.99 and then you steal it, now you have it and I don't. I'm out $0.99 of value and you stole $0.99 of value. But what if you steal the candy bar directly from the store? You got $0.99 of value, but the store didn't pay $0.99 for that candy bar; they may have only paid $0.40. W…

This analogy is also wrong, exactly for the reason that IP is not a physical thing that can be taken - it can only be copied. Yes, by leaving $0.40, I would be stealing $0.59 of foregone revenue, but that is because the shop doesn't have that candy bar anymore and can't sell it. In case of IP, even if I pirate it, you can still sell it to other people. Of course you probably can't sell it to me anymore and that may b…

> Of course you probably can't sell it to me anymore and that may be lost revenue

Yes, this is the point.

> but it depends if I would be actually willing and able to buy that IP otherwise

I'm not entitled to your money, of course, but in exactly the same way, you're not entitled to my IP (or my candy bar).

> In case of IP, even if I pirate it, you can still sell it to other people.

If everyone followed your logic, no I couldn't.

Re: IBM bans USB, SD cards, flash drives and portable devices from every office

#185

Post by agumonkey »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #128
agumonkey wrote: post #63

I hope employees don't use sonoff wifi plugs :)

Is there something particularly bad about Sonoff (as opposed to most other IoT devices, where the saying "the S in IoT stands for security" applies)?

nah just that its the cheap mainstream model

Re: IBM bans USB, SD cards, flash drives and portable devices from every office

#187

Post by ghein »

slededit wrote: post #112
cf498 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sorry if it came across as a personal attack, I didnt want to imply that you are personally negligent or unqualified to make that call. For all I know it is your job to make those policies at your place off work. The problem is a User with this attitude whos job isnt to make that call. Strictly speaking, If a user in a workplace where this behavior is against the security policy acts like this or expresses this…

The problem with blanket policies like this for an entire organization is that they don't consider the type of work being done. A publicist for example has as their job to distribute information publicly, you aren't helping them by making it impossible to drop off a USB key to someone. A software developer has a need to install operating systems much more frequently than an average user. You can net-install but usb m…

I've come across this with data security policies at law firms, accountants, and investment banks.

They have to protect sensitive client data. Need to protect against illegitimate leaks of data. And the universal way that they communicate with clients, opposing parties, regulators? Email.

You can't force the SEC to accept your new encrypted cloud solution, nor can you require opposing counsel to use YOUR solution. And communicating with hostile parties is the entire organization's reason for existing.

"Simple and reasonable" IT approaches to problems frequently break down when faced with people whose job it is to deal with other organizations.

Re: IBM bans USB, SD cards, flash drives and portable devices from every office

#188

Post by mattrices »

snowwrestler wrote: post #184
kruczek wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This analogy is also wrong, exactly for the reason that IP is not a physical thing that can be taken - it can only be copied. Yes, by leaving $0.40, I would be stealing $0.59 of foregone revenue, but that is because the shop doesn't have that candy bar anymore and can't sell it. In case of IP, even if I pirate it, you can still sell it to other people. Of course you probably can't sell it to me anymore and that may b…

> Of course you probably can't sell it to me anymore and that may be lost revenue Yes, this is the point. > but it depends if I would be actually willing and able to buy that IP otherwise I'm not entitled to your money, of course, but in exactly the same way, you're not entitled to my IP (or my candy bar). > In case of IP, even if I pirate it, you can still sell it to other people. If everyone followed your logic, no…

Your candybar arguement is absurd because you can't sell ip direct to consumers. You could manufacture a product that uses it or sell access via some supply limiting portal, but that is much different than actually selling ip.

Additionally it's not inventory because it is not finite. There is a distinction made by GAAP regarding valuation of tangible vs intangible assets because it is much more complex process to valuate intangible assets such as ip.

Re: IBM bans USB, SD cards, flash drives and portable devices from every office

#189

Post by snowwrestler »

mattrices wrote: post #188
snowwrestler wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course you probably can't sell it to me anymore and that may be lost revenue Yes, this is the point. > but it depends if I would be actually willing and able to buy that IP otherwise I'm not entitled to your money, of course, but in exactly the same way, you're not entitled to my IP (or my candy bar). > In case of IP, even if I pirate it, you can still sell it to other people. If everyone followed your logic, no…

Your candybar arguement is absurd because you can't sell ip direct to consumers. You could manufacture a product that uses it or sell access via some supply limiting portal, but that is much different than actually selling ip. Additionally it's not inventory because it is not finite. There is a distinction made by GAAP regarding valuation of tangible vs intangible assets because it is much more complex process to val…

Physical inventory and IP are analogous in that they are both types of property that their owner intends to use to generate revenue (and hopefully profit).

> it is much more complex process to valuate intangible assets such as ip.

Please note that my argument above assigns a value of $0.00 to the IP itself.

Even at that valuation, you can still commit theft by robbing me of the opportunity to use that IP to generate revenue. By analogy: when you steal a TV, you are charged on the retail price of the TV (the amount you should have paid for it), not the wholesale price (the amount the store paid for it).

Re: IBM bans USB, SD cards, flash drives and portable devices from every office

#190

Post by mattrices »

snowwrestler wrote: post #189
mattrices wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your candybar arguement is absurd because you can't sell ip direct to consumers. You could manufacture a product that uses it or sell access via some supply limiting portal, but that is much different than actually selling ip. Additionally it's not inventory because it is not finite. There is a distinction made by GAAP regarding valuation of tangible vs intangible assets because it is much more complex process to val…

Physical inventory and IP are analogous in that they are both types of property that their owner intends to use to generate revenue (and hopefully profit). > it is much more complex process to valuate intangible assets such as ip. Please note that my argument above assigns a value of $0.00 to the IP itself. Even at that valuation, you can still commit theft by robbing me of the opportunity to use that IP to generate…

Your intention is irrelevant, limiting your opportunity is not theft. You're using that analogy as an emotional appeal to present the ip holder as a victim.

Any competitor could limit your opportunity by releasing a functionally similar non infringing product. Would you choose the word 'robbing' in that circumstance?

One would have to use your ip to create a competing product before it would even be copyright infringement, and it still wouldn't be theft since you cannot steal somthing intangible since by definition it only exists as an abstraction which is not the same as zero valued tangible inventory.

Post reply on HN