nanog mailing list archives
Re: Banc of America Article
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 19:22:58 -0500 (EST)
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
Does anyone else, based upon the assumptions above, believe this statement to be patently incorrect (specifically, the part about 'personal information had not been at risk.') ?
Patently incorrect? No. It is possible. Even if the confidentiality of your data is protected, you are still vulnerability to attacks on availability and integrity of the data. For example, you may fully encrypt all your data, use VPNs, etc. But you can still loose service due to network congestion or routers failing due to other unprotected traffic on your network. One of the most common mistakes I see rookie security people make is thinking "confidentiality" is the only business requirement.
Current thread:
- Banc of America Article Alex Rubenstein (Jan 25)
- Re: Banc of America Article Jack Bates (Jan 25)
- Re: Banc of America Article Sean Donelan (Jan 25)
- Re: Banc of America Article alex (Jan 27)
- Re: Banc of America Article Avleen Vig (Jan 25)
- Re: Banc of America Article Ryan Fox (Jan 25)
- Re: Banc of America Article Alex Rubenstein (Jan 25)
- Re: Banc of America Article E.B. Dreger (Jan 25)
- Re: Banc of America Article Dave Howe (Jan 26)
- Re: Banc of America Article Ryan Fox (Jan 25)
- Re: Banc of America Article Wayne E. Bouchard (Jan 25)
- Re: Banc of America Article alex (Jan 27)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Banc of America Article Alex Rubenstein (Jan 25)