Re: RAID 5 drive replacement schedule

[Adriel Desautels <adriel () netragard com>]

Philippe,
	I think that this conversation has become too philosophical (mental 
masturbation even). The roles of an IT department depend on the entity 
in which the IT department exists. What people should do, and what 
people are actually responsible for are usually two different things.

	With respect to CIA, it is not the end-all be-all definition to 
Information Security, IT Security, or any other form of security. It is 
a good acronym to help people remember important aspects of security, 
but in my opinion thats about it. (and no I don't want to get into 
another CIA discussion.)

        

Regards,
        Adriel T. Desautels
        Chief Technology Officer
        Netragard, LLC.
        Office : 617-934-0269
        Mobile : 617-633-3821
        http://www.linkedin.com/pub/1/118/a45

        Join the Netragard, LLC. Linked In Group:
        http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/48683/0B98E1705142

---------------------------------------------------------------
Netragard, LLC - http://www.netragard.com  -  "We make IT Safe"
Penetration Testing, Vulnerability Assessments, Website Security

Netragard Whitepaper Downloads:
-------------------------------
Choosing the right provider : http://tinyurl.com/2ahk3j
Three Things you must know  : http://tinyurl.com/26pjsn


Rivest, Philippe wrote:
> The purpose of IT is to abide by the rules and decision made by the data
> owner (be it system or entity owner). No design should be done, before you
> know the classification of the data simply because they may be no need for
> redundancy or they may be specific needs.
>
> You stated it back wards when you said:
> - My thought is that at some point it comes down to system design and basic
> IT considerations.
>
> Also you are incorrect with this statement:
> -Simplified it seems to me that the entire purpose of IT is to ensure
> availability.
>
> The purpose of IT is to respect the CIA in regards to the need of the company
> or data owner, no more or no less. IT is only an organization that services
> the needs of the data/system owner in a technological manner.
>
>
> Merci / Thanks
> Philippe Rivest, CEH
> Vérificateur interne en sécurité de l'information
> Courriel: Privest () transforce ca
> Téléphone: (514) 331-4417
> www.transforce.ca
>
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Nick Vaernhoej [mailto:nick.vaernhoej () capitalcardservices com] 
> Envoyé : 25 juin 2008 10:16
> À : Rivest, Philippe; security-basics () securityfocus com
> Objet : RE: RAID 5 drive replacement schedule
>
> Philippe,
>
> I have been sitting here typing up one response after another, each time
> ending up deleting the whole thing and starting over in an attempt to make
> cases illustrating how availability is not always a security concern.
>
> My thought is that at some point it comes down to system design and basic IT
> considerations.
> But this argument is inadequate. Just because it is within IT to design
> redundancy it doesn't mean that it isn't a security concern.
>
> My issue with this criteria is then, that it now sounds like IT is a subset
> of security. Not an equal or the other way around.
> Simplified it seems to me that the entire purpose of IT is to ensure
> availability.
>
> Nick Vaernhoej
> "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
>
> -  -----Original Message-----
> -  From: Rivest, Philippe [mailto:PRivest () transforce ca]
> -  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 8:26 AM
> -  To: Nick Vaernhoej; security-basics () securityfocus com
> -  Subject: RE: RAID 5 drive replacement schedule
> -  
> -  Im not to sure about which part of my previous post you think is up to
> -  interpretation, if you could clarify that would help.
> -  
> -  But for your scenario:
> -  
> -  If I understand correctly your scenario, I know it's a resume, but it
> -  is
> -  flawed in the basic concept of availability.
> -  
> -  If you have a safe box, with a door and a lock on it. No body can
> -  access the
> -  box and it is only available to the key holder (hence confidentiality
> -  and
> -  integrity could be assumed to be good). If this is the situation you
> -  stated
> -  then here is the concern for availability. What if the key is lost?
> -  What if
> -  the door lock is damage and can no longer open?
> -  
> -  If you go about to keep a second (back up) key pair, you would
> -  consider this
> -  availability safeguard. If you had another way to get in the room with
> -  the
> -  box, that would also be considered a backup safeguard for
> -  availability.
> -  
> -  
> -  Hope this helped.
> -  
> -  Merci / Thanks
> -  Philippe Rivest, CEH
> -  Vérificateur interne en sécurité de l'information
> -  Courriel: Privest () transforce ca
> -  Téléphone: (514) 331-4417
> -  www.transforce.ca
>
> This electronic transmission is intended for the addressee (s) named above.
> It contains information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise
> protected from use and disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient you
> are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copy, or dissemination of
> this transmission or the taking of any action in reliance on its contents, or
> other use is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in
> error, please notify the sender that this message was received in error and
> then delete this message.
> Thank you.