<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why no one person should control it all</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mckeay.net/2008/07/16/why-no-one-person-should-control-it-all/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mckeay.net/2008/07/16/why-no-one-person-should-control-it-all/</link>
	<description>The views of one man on security, privacy and anything else that catches his attention</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 10:00:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rob Lewis</title>
		<link>http://www.mckeay.net/2008/07/16/why-no-one-person-should-control-it-all/comment-page-1/#comment-3039</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:32:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mckeay.net/2008/07/16/why-no-one-person-should-control-it-all/#comment-3039</guid>
		<description>As Andrew Jacquith says in his book, Security Metrics: &quot;Trust is good. Control is better&quot;.

Dual key controls go along way to preventing this kind of thing. So does tamper-proof audit trails based on user roles. This is not the first time an individual has held an enterpise  hostage. Is it really a safe option not to assume the possibility of evil administratrors?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Andrew Jacquith says in his book, Security Metrics: &#8220;Trust is good. Control is better&#8221;.</p>
<p>Dual key controls go along way to preventing this kind of thing. So does tamper-proof audit trails based on user roles. This is not the first time an individual has held an enterpise  hostage. Is it really a safe option not to assume the possibility of evil administratrors?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Clifton</title>
		<link>http://www.mckeay.net/2008/07/16/why-no-one-person-should-control-it-all/comment-page-1/#comment-2964</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Clifton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:46:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mckeay.net/2008/07/16/why-no-one-person-should-control-it-all/#comment-2964</guid>
		<description>Scott:

 I would say more to a point of taking drive images and having a forensics expert looking into it and hopefully mapping his actions to when these issues started. Very strange story though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scott:</p>
<p> I would say more to a point of taking drive images and having a forensics expert looking into it and hopefully mapping his actions to when these issues started. Very strange story though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Morrison</title>
		<link>http://www.mckeay.net/2008/07/16/why-no-one-person-should-control-it-all/comment-page-1/#comment-2962</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Morrison</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:04:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mckeay.net/2008/07/16/why-no-one-person-should-control-it-all/#comment-2962</guid>
		<description>While I wouldn&#039;t want to speculate on whether or not Childs has implemented a data bomb, I question the utility of a physical remote control device, not to mention any sort of remote control that would be obvious to police or security teams searching his apartment.

A databomb is more likely to be on a watchdog timer, a logical deadman&#039;s switch, or triggered via network access or other predetermined network conditions. If they don&#039;t have access to the involved systems, they&#039;re not likely to find such a bomb, or determine the triggering method.

There&#039;s an issue with the &quot;let &#039;em nuke it and restore from backup&quot; option, too. If there is a databomb, how long ago did our dear antagonist place it? How long ago was the latest clean backup? Restoring from a backup set that&#039;s recent enough to have useful data might simply be restoring the logic bomb, too.

The whole thing has been compromised, and needs a top down review by security professionals, along with clean rebuilds and data-only restores.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I wouldn&#8217;t want to speculate on whether or not Childs has implemented a data bomb, I question the utility of a physical remote control device, not to mention any sort of remote control that would be obvious to police or security teams searching his apartment.</p>
<p>A databomb is more likely to be on a watchdog timer, a logical deadman&#8217;s switch, or triggered via network access or other predetermined network conditions. If they don&#8217;t have access to the involved systems, they&#8217;re not likely to find such a bomb, or determine the triggering method.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s an issue with the &#8220;let &#8216;em nuke it and restore from backup&#8221; option, too. If there is a databomb, how long ago did our dear antagonist place it? How long ago was the latest clean backup? Restoring from a backup set that&#8217;s recent enough to have useful data might simply be restoring the logic bomb, too.</p>
<p>The whole thing has been compromised, and needs a top down review by security professionals, along with clean rebuilds and data-only restores.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
