Re: Where to Begin
Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jun/03/bill-gates-warren-buffett-new-nuclear-reactor-wyoming-natrium
2001 publicly visible posts • joined 28 Jan 2016
The original act was the Data Protection Act of 1984
Followed by the Access to Personal Files Act 1987
Then the Data Protection Act 1998 based on the EU directive 95/46/EC
Then the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 based on 2002/58/EC
Then the DPA 2018 based on the GDPR
In tandem, the Uk started the information security standardisation by developing BS 7799 which evolved into ISO/IEC 17799 that then became the ISO 27001 that we all love
yeah but they have the pennies to pay for someone to catch these issues, most of us don't.
The problem is they choose to give those pennies to CXOs or shareholders rather than spend them on making stuff that, you know, works.
Also chances are the code comes from some of us that didn't have the bandwidth to deal with the bugs, but contributed it to some OSS or forum to prove a point.
The German government acting in its capacity is able to change the german constitution or initiate actions to that effect, very much "Intra Vires" as in within their power.
This does not affect the previous decisions of the court which are and will continue to be valid under the constitution at the time, but the representatives of the german Volk can and should be able to amend the constitution applying to them.
the point is the dollar and the pound are not backed by gold silver or anything else, just like cryptocurrencies.
The UK won't go to war to protect the value of a pound; if they did, the value of it would fall considerably, the same as the dollar...
both central reserve banks have been creating their respective currencies out of thin air in their trillions, in the process of quantitative easing, that has been going on seriously to get the markets out of the 2008 crash.
I fail to see the reference to the film, about an anti-soviet conspiracy controlled by a computer.
Personally, I see all currency as a bad investment and turn cash into something tangible at the first opportunity.
I was pointing out the fact so-called "real" currencies are just as vulnerable as crypto, look at the countries that have revalued their currencies in recent years, compared to the amount of crypto that has failed.
The Venezuelan Bolivar in 2018 and 2021, the Belarusian Ruble in 2016, the Turkish lira in 2005, the multitude of re-valuations for the Zimbabwe dollar between 2006 and 2009, the Italian lira was on the verge of a re-valuation when the euro came in.
Huawei kit is cheap, easy to buy (their finance terms are amazing) its more efficient and less power hungry than the Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung kit and was basically taking over the RAN market
The security issue was moot, the HCSEC the GCHQ offshoot that has oversight of all Huawei kit deployed in the uk, its source code and hardware, has said their coding is so auful and their software standards so bad, that if there were CCP back doors they were indistinguishable from the exploitable bugs in the code that was exploitable by everyone else. This assessment was freely available to all in the US of A and any other of the Five nations separated by a common language.
so basically Uncle Sam shot himself in the foot and the rest of us along with him, causing us all to either keep the cheap kit flowing with the company's stability (due to it no longer being able to get US components) being shot, or rip and replace with inferior more expensive kit
try literally any other collaboration tool.
You'll find that Lync For business AKA teams, is clunky resource hogging and lacking in functionality
Webex, Zoom and Slack are the big guys, but a myriad of smaller providers provide similar or better services at a better quality.
The problem is, as with Excel, "Everyone" uses it, and it's "free" (Included) with your O365 costs, so the PHB and finance wonks, refuse to pay for something that's better because it is good enough...
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
They all signed up to it, its up to them to abide by it
as i said about 5 months ago now:
depends where they list it
New York - Great for US companies
London - Vote of confidence in Post Brexit Britain
Frankfurt - Vote of confidence in Europe (no-confidence in Britain)
Hong Kong - Bad for the US, Good for china
Tokyo - Where SoftBank is at, probably the best neutral location.
but all of them will be competing, and it might end up dual listed
Teams is "Included" in the solutions businesses already pay for.
Zoom, Webex, Chime, Meet, etc cost on top of that.
Teams like all things Microsoft is full of holes and bloat and its update mechanism looks like an ATP maintaining persistence, but you get what you pay for.
at least its vaguely useable has caught up with most of the features of the easier-to-use systems, doesn't make claims that it has security that it doesn't, and is bringing online new features too...
Basically Teams is here to stay, so you are going to have to get used to it
The Lansley reforms brought in by the Health and social care act 2012 broke the NHS into 3000 organisations with their own boards that had to compete with each other and private providers to provide NHS branded services.
these organisations have their own boards of directors getting paid £100k+ each and have no economies of scale or power when negotiating with suppliers.
if you look NHS-wide, this has driven up costs and down quality and support, according to a study released yesterday, this has also correlated with an increase in avoidable deaths
Basically, the NHS is broken and the Torries did it.
a couple more resources to throw at the auditors:
https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/collection/passwords
https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/blog-post/your-password-expiry-policy-may-have-reached-its-expiry-date
https://www.troyhunt.com/passwords-evolved-authentication-guidance-for-the-modern-era/
really doesn't work. it just drives bad behaviour (I'll add 1 to the number on the end)
the AGs should really read the NIST SP 800-63b
"Verifiers SHOULD NOT require memorized secrets to be changed arbitrarily (e.g., periodically).
However, verifiers SHALL force a change if there is evidence of compromise of the
authenticator."
yeah, but let's not start done the acronym reuse in the same space rabbit hole
Just ask a physicist what rho represents.
I still go back to this quote I found somewhere:
Build your network as if the endpoint is owned.
Build your endpoint as if the network is owned.
– @0DDJ0BB
— SecuriTay (@SwiftOnSecurity) November 21, 2015