In a departure from normal practice, I comment upon an event unreported, as far as I can tell, in The Wall Street Journal. For me, some things transcend politics.
Maybe I missed it. Or maybe The Wall Street Journal didn’t see fit to print the leaked transcripts of President Trump’s post-inauguration phone calls with the leaders of Mexico and Australia.
What does it say that this story, blaring over the TV newswires, wasn’t printed? Does it say something about some organizations placing the Nation’s security above their own circulation numbers? Is that a control you can rely on? Apparently not from everyone.
Even if the paper had or did print something on this, what does the leak of those transcripts say about information governance? First, does the White House have adequate controls and culture in place? Clearly not. Maybe General Kelly can help with that.
But what about the person who signed an oath and nonetheless decided to leak these classified transcripts to the press, thinking little or nothing about the impact on future calls between world leaders? What’s their understanding of duty? Placing the Nation’s needs above those of party or self?
Hang ’em high.
Filed under Access, Compliance, Controls, Culture, Duty, Employees, Governance, Government, Internal controls, Protect assets, Third parties
Someone breaches your security perimeter and hacks your product. Relax, it was only a job interview.
“GM Hires Famed Jeep Hackers,” The Wall Street Journal, August 1, 2017 B5. The people who that successfully hacked a moving Jeep have been hired by GM to advise on cybersecurity.
I guess it’s better to have them inside the tent rather than outside. But it’s only a guess.
Sony was not alone. HBO gets hacked, too, and Netflix. Is nothing sacred?
“Hackers Stole HBO Programming,” The Wall Street Journal, August 1, 2017 B2. Game of Thrones may be coming sooner than planned. Hacker also got personal information on at least one executive.
How well is your information protected? What’s that protection worth?
Filed under Access, Controls, Governance, Information, Internal controls, IT, Management, Protect, Protect assets, Protect information assets, Security, Value
“Apple Eases Its Grip in Chinese Data,” The Wall Street Journal, July 13, 2017 B3. “To comply with tough new cybersecurity rules, Apple will begin storing all cloud data for its Chinese customers with a government owned company [in China] ….” Apple “will retain control over encryption keys.” That makes me much more comfortable.
It might appear that China is exerting its grip on the data stored by Chinese customers on iCloud. But whose data is it, anyway? And what if other countries take similar steps with their citizens’ data? Any opportunity for mischief?
“Faux Ransomware Does Damage,” The Wall Street Journal, June 30, 2017 B3. Motive for recent attacks was not blackmail, but just disruption. The files that were attacked may not be recoverable. “Malware Leaves Big Law Firm Hobbled,” The Wall Street Journal, June 30, 2017 B3. DLA Piper shuts down after its computer systems hit. “Hospital Is Forced To Scrap Computers,” The Wall Street Journal, June 30, 2017 B3. West Virginia hospital tosses its entire computer network after cyberattack.
Have the Visigoths gathered at the gate? If we can’t protect our computers and the information they contain and send, does our civilization survive? Is IT now more important that all the other functions?
Filed under Access, Business Case, Business Continuity, Controls, Information, Interconnections, IT, Operations, Risk, Security, Value
It’s Groundhog Day. Or becoming a dog-bites-man story.
“Cyberattack’s Fallout Fuels Scramble,” The Wall Street Journal, June 29, 2017 B3. A ransomware attack through Microsoft Windows hits Maersk, Merck, WPP, and Rosneft, among others. Surgeries disrupted at a Pennsylvania hospital. “Hospital Operator In Pennsylvania Works to Recover,” The Wall Street Journal, June 29, 2017 B3.
Does this become so routine we forget people are supposed to take steps to prevent it? Do cyberattacks make the board agenda, without the tie to the greater information governance questions? Is that progress? Does industry not see the bigger risk?
Filed under Access, Controls, Duty of Care, Governance, Information, Interconnections, Internal controls, IT, Oversight, Protect assets, Security, Third parties, Value
What are you buying when you go to the grocery store? Organic bananas?
Not if you’re Amazon.
“Big Prize for Amazon: Shopper Data,” The Wall Street Journal, June 21, 2017 B5. Amazon seeks to buy Whole Foods, but for what? Its hard assets such as stores and locations? Its customer base? Its purchasing and distribution network? More likely: information on how shoppers shop.
If you’re the government agency in charge of approving or disapproving this deal, how do you analyze the impact on competition? What is the “market” that needs to be analyzed? Is this a vertical or horizontal deal? Or something else?
Is most of the value (to Amazon) in this deal the information that it gets? Where’s that on the Whole Foods balance sheet?