[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <00bc01c394fc$87c797e0$182ea8c0@LUFKIN.DPSOL.COM>
From: purdy at tecman.com (Curt Purdy)
Subject: NASA experience
> From my experience working at NASA (moffet field as an intern one
> summer) was that their IT department (in my building) was good at what
> they did but had a pretty restrictive security policy (which is a good
> thing i guess). So i would rate them as excellent although too
> restrictive.
> --
> Jason Freidman <jason.full-disclosure@...pnski.com>
Since a primary tenant of all good security policies is the principle of
least privilage that baisically states that no-one should have more access
than the absolute minimum necessary to do their job. Of course no-one
really does this that I have seen. But a good yard-stick of your security
policy and implementation is if everyone complains it is too strict.
As long as you have the support of managment, this is when I feel most
comfortable. It looks like NASA is doing it right, which I have always
heard. Being ahead of the curve, 4 years ago they instituted a comprehenive
vullnerability assessment and patching and remediation program that turned
the hostile penetration rate from over 20% to less than 1% in a year.
Curt Purdy CISSP, GSEC, MCSE+I, CNE, CCDA
Information Security Engineer
DP Solutions
----------------------------------------
If you spend more on coffee than on IT security, you will be hacked.
What's more, you deserve to be hacked.
-- White House cybersecurity adviser Richard Clarke
Powered by blists - more mailing lists