U.S. Senate to probe whether legislation needed to combat cyber attacks
1–10 of 66 posts
Re: U.S. Senate to probe whether legislation needed to combat cyber attacks
#2reverse the terrible ITAR legacy
fund foundational security and mandate its use by government agencies and suppliers
Re: U.S. Senate to probe whether legislation needed to combat cyber attacks
#3It's mind boggling that the government needs to require this. What bureaucrat is refusing some IT person from requesting the funds doing this?
Re: U.S. Senate to probe whether legislation needed to combat cyber attacks
#4It's mind boggling that the government needs to require this. What bureaucrat is refusing some IT person from requesting the funds doing this?
Literally all of them. Security is a cost center, and non bureaucrats salaries are minimized as much as possible until you are left with "warm body to fill chair". Even the NSA doesn't pay well, compared to private sector.
Re: U.S. Senate to probe whether legislation needed to combat cyber attacks
#5I am always worried non-programmers don't sufficiently understand how pathetic it is that we limp along with bloated Unix and other accidents of history that were never retired. And this lassies-fair approach to cleanliness and reducing complexity both makes us more vulnerable and less productive.
Re: U.S. Senate to probe whether legislation needed to combat cyber attacks
#6It's mind boggling that the government needs to require this. What bureaucrat is refusing some IT person from requesting the funds doing this?
It's very hard to get raises or promotions on all the bad things that would have happened, had your actions not entirely prevented them. Much better to devote those resources to new initiatives or "transformations" or whatever, ideally ones that can be tied directly to higher revenue, while doing just enough about security that you can't be accused of being unusually lax if something goes wrong (and since all your peers are very lax, for the same reasons, this isn't much).
Re: U.S. Senate to probe whether legislation needed to combat cyber attacks
#7Legislation is required to reverse the posture of the NSA from offense to defense. Nothing else will help until that is done.
Re: U.S. Senate to probe whether legislation needed to combat cyber attacks
#8It's mind boggling that the government needs to require this. What bureaucrat is refusing some IT person from requesting the funds doing this?
Literally all of them. Security is a cost center, and non bureaucrats salaries are minimized as much as possible until you are left with "warm body to fill chair". Even the NSA doesn't pay well, compared to private sector.
The gap between the security and defense seems to be becoming smaller. If some of the defense budget was put towards cyber defense, I bet we could see some drastic improvements.
Re: U.S. Senate to probe whether legislation needed to combat cyber attacks
#9It's mind boggling that the government needs to require this. What bureaucrat is refusing some IT person from requesting the funds doing this?
Literally all of them. Security is a cost center, and non bureaucrats salaries are minimized as much as possible until you are left with "warm body to fill chair". Even the NSA doesn't pay well, compared to private sector.
I'm wholly aware the private sector pays better, but in the grand scheme of pay/average citizen, they still make decent salaries. In that regard, why is upper management ignoring IT security at a base-line level of at least rotating backups? Like even that is pretty cheap and you can revert systems back within a day or two with a few days of lost work. Nobody is saying have a top tier security team.
Re: U.S. Senate to probe whether legislation needed to combat cyber attacks
#10I am always worried non-programmers don't sufficiently understand how pathetic it is that we limp along with bloated Unix and other accidents of history that were never retired. And this lassies-fair approach to cleanliness and reducing complexity both makes us more vulnerable and less productive.
Why single out Unix and not, you know, Windows?