b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 7810222 (Thread)

# I was going to add that
Surely we should be stringing up the twat that thought popping it in a brown envelope with a first class stamp on would work.

We shouldn't be mocking Darling for that, we should be mocking him for his funny name and eyebrow/hair combo!
(, Thu 22 Nov 2007, 12:10, archived)
# I believe they're currently in
"a secure location"

lest the parents of the United Kingdom find out who they are.

I noticed the Tories calling for Gordon Brown to admit his guilt as well... :/
(, Thu 22 Nov 2007, 12:12, archived)
# This is not strictly true.
It's really the IT system and the policies for using it that were to blame; it's obviously not the first time some civil servant didn't follow procedures.
Obviously the bosses there don't care how insecure their systems and policies are, and it's Mr. Darling's job to get them to care. So he failed to do that, and he's therefore culpable.
(, Thu 22 Nov 2007, 12:16, archived)
# Well, it went in the internal mail did it not?
My sis used to be a fairly high up civil servant and said she's enver known anything to go missing in the internal mail...

It's all a bit fishy if you ask me. Which you didn't.
(, Thu 22 Nov 2007, 12:21, archived)
# Yeah,
but they shouldn't need to burn stuff to CD. The issue is, their database is centralised. Obviously they need to share that data with places around the country, but the system has no encrypted data connections anywhere else. So they obviously tend to just email or post the bank accounts of all the people in the country to other places. I'm sure this instance isn't the fist time they've done this; it surely happens all the time because they don't have much choice.
The bosses do know about the insecure system, as does Mr. Darling if he has any competence at his job. So his failure is not to have instigated a drive to improve the security.
(, Thu 22 Nov 2007, 12:26, archived)
# Surely the fault of the head of IT??
Unless they don't have one, in which case that's a very serious oversight indeed...
(, Thu 22 Nov 2007, 12:29, archived)
# Procedure?
I would be astonished if the procedure specified encryption, trusting instead the courier not to lose/steal it.
(, Thu 22 Nov 2007, 12:23, archived)
# Ah but with a courier it's traceable isn't it...
someone has to sign for it at the other end, and they can trace who's had the package at any one point...

The REAL cock up is taking several weeks to notice there was something wrong...
(, Thu 22 Nov 2007, 12:25, archived)