Re: SCADA

[Brian Loe <knobdy () gmail com>]

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Paul D. Robertson <paul () compuwar net> wrote:

> 1.  I'm not sure "no more" fits in the definition- for instance a system
> that's designed to send company email can also send personal email- how
> does that make the system less reliable?

It propably - or probably should - violates the company's appropriate
use policy. It may also induce a non-business reply, or forwards,
which may introduce spam and viruses.


> > That's not exactly true. A system that does exactly what it
> > is supposed to - no more, no less - is achievable. It's not
>
> I'm not sure it's achievable.  General purpose systems are too flexible to
> be completely locked down.  I can use my "Shift" key to play the Monty
> Python theme, certainly not a design goal...

You don't put general purpose systems on a SCADA network. They don't
do email - nor do they have an email client installed. The are there
to do one thing, run the SCADA application. Everything else has been
removed or disabled.

One could argue that you don't put general purpose systems on the
corporate network either. You put accounting systems in the accounting
department and HR systems in the HR department.
_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com
https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards