Storm in a tea cup, why should boring everyday pictures be encrypted they're hardly a massive national threat to the country, tools.
Security experts said it would be child's play for thieves to access sensitive data on the Duchess of York's stolen laptop, despite the use of password protection. Fergie's computer, swiped during a break in to a photography studio last Thursday, reportedly revealed Manchester United's January transfer window targets …
"Given the fact that the Royal Family was involved with the pictures held on this laptop, the data should have been encrypted - full stop,"
Why? Are the royals something special or are they just better than the rest of us.
Anyone who gives a shit about what is on this laptop needs to get a life.
We mere clock-punching workers have our personal details stolen or misplaced in bulk, mine nestling amongst hundreds of thousands or millions more.
The Royal Family, on the other hand, has a much lower details-to-laptop ratio: in this instance, it would seem that Fergie and her girls have an entire laptop to themselves, a bit like taking their personal data taking a chartered Lear jet rather than sitting cross-legged in the cargo hold of an easyJet flight.
Who says we live in a classless society?
Some companies have security policies created by nincompoops stating that because USB sticks have got lost by idiots in the past we will make everyone save all their sensitive company data onto laptops, which have passwords (therefore secure) and which we will prominently carry home every night in bags with prominently displayed computer logos on them, because if we kept them in the office they might get stolen..
Carrying a computer bag home after dark (with aformentioned well recognisable computer logo on back) will not increase the chances of the data falling into the wrong hands... especially seeing as we carry them home on a daily basis, through the same neighbourhood night after night, following the same route, carrying laptops with non-encrypted data on them.
It's fool proof.
Too bad it's not proof against anything else.
Anon because USB sticks with encrypted data are inherently bad, ok?
Exactly what is not in the public domain ? We have seen pictures of all the family, unless these are embarrassing or explicit then this is hardly of concern.
Of course they should be using some form of encryption... but it takes more effort on the part of the user.
I'm surprised this made the news.
Imagine all the dasTARDly deeds they could do with the pictures! They could...errm:
look at them
laugh at them
try (stupidly) to sell them to the media, get laughed at themselves and nicked
print them out and use them for dart practise
print them out and give people paper cuts
Not exactly WMDs are they now...
Michael Callahan needs to STFU and "it beggars belief" that he is so desperate for his name to appear in print that he would come out with such crap.
PH because she is about as news worthy as this article.
Or not as the case may be, or wasn't rather, in this particular Madam's case.
Still, it's nice to know the police are on the job. Or do they just shuffle papers for these things like they did when someone stole my bicycle?
I mean, how the hell are they supposed to find it?
"so it beggars belief that the Royal Family's security staff - who are supposedly drawn from the upper echelons of the Police and UK Security Services - didn't pick up on the need for IT security on the photos."
Unfortunately, no, it doesn't beggar belief at all. Standard thought processes seem to not be able to tell the difference between encryption and password-protected. I've been asked what the difference is by people who really should know better too many times to be comfortable.
"Tools"? I see why you're AC, you realize your own stupidity but can't put your finger on it.
To help you along: It's not the pictures in se that have to be encrypted, it's the entire HD contents. That a (probably virus-laden) laptop is not the most efficient way to transport a few pics is also pointed out in the article, but in itself an unrelated WTF.
Note to ElReg: stick to single bullet points in articles, you confuse some of the plebs.
one of our exec lost his laptop for the 2nd time in 6 months (yes, lost not stolen)
IT support dude to execs PA "does he have a back-up?"
PA "err, I don't think so where do we get one of those?"
so "upper echelons of the Police and UK Security Services" eh?
well they have a great record on keeping data safe don't they?
blind leading the blind if you ask me, and they want more of our data every week, god help us!
mines the one with the winning lottery ticket in the pocket please
publicity scarce ex-royal, now wannabe tv star, leaves laptop(?) in photo developers, and says in a loud voice, "oh don't look in that folder on the desktop named 'Private sexy pics/vids of a real live duchess who has tea with the queen and talks all posh and stuff' please" as i would be so embarrassed at all the publicity that would generate".
In food factories, the possibilities for products left out for testing were:
1) Useless - Product not stolen
2) Marketable - Products totally vanished
3) Crap idea - Products stolen, but quickly brought back.
Expect this laptop to be returned once the product has been examined.
What on Earth is she going to have on the laptop that is any more or less important then information that anyone else may or may not have. Maybe a calander! Oh Noes! But then it's no different from her phone being stolen, oh noes they have her phone address book. Waahhh
Maybe she happend to have the laptop with her becouse she was working on it doing other things, I know several people who generally have their laptop on them to write things, email things, and generally do other things. There are a multitude of reasons why she may have thought "ah I'll use my laptop" instead of troting around with a USB stick that would be no use to her unless she could get access to a pc.
Stop trying to be clever and live with the fact that you're a bland unintelligent know it all.
Various and assorted jackholes in your government have thus far lost or managed to get stolen sensitive information on what.... probably half the population now? And yet some how those same types just because they are working for the royal family would apply better data security practices? Hummm, yeah given the track record this year alone I don't think that will be happening.
BTW, @Vincent: Porn pictures of the royal family, Porn pictures of the royal family, Porn pictures of the royal family... Oh and probably money shots with Fergie on the receiving end... muahahahaha
One the fact that this has made the news and Two the fact that a laptop with sensitive date on was not encrypted.... We might not deem this to be sensitive but someone clearly does... Which brings me to Password protection is not good for anything other than delaying the outcome of getting the information. Hacking a password takes a matter of minutes and if you have not encrypted the Laptop then its your own fault. Encrypt to 256 bit and have the login at pre boot... We have installed Check Point FDE for this very reason and have ticked all the boxes for FIP 140-2 requirements...
These so called IT bods are getting paid a lot of tax payers money for nothing!
Encrypt stuff you don't want other people to look at.
This will be different for me, for you, for the Financial Organisation I work for, for the government, the police and for the military.
Thats why the first step in Information Security is classification. Only when you put a value on Information can you establish the appropriate method/s of protection.
Unfortunately this is not appreciated by many... even though many of us make these kind of decisions everyday (whether to go ex-directory, withhold our telephone numbers etc)
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019