Call us now:
It is clear that we will never know all the information relating to this story. So on the face of what is known, seven and a half years……………..was in “flagrant breach†of tight security rules when he used his mobile phone to remove material from a computer system and transfer it to his private computer on August 24, 2022.
Rightly exposing highly sensitive data belonging to UK government security services is illegal and should be punished. For that there is no doubt. But, and it’s a big but………….how does the punishment reflect what happened?
So much for the application of the tight security rules. You take a person who it is reported lives on the autistic spectrum. Who was able to get hold of the data in the first place to put it on his personal devices. Even if they were not on the autistic spectrum, how were they allowed their mobile phone anywhere near sensitive data?
I for one am not saying that the compromise of GCHQ data should not go un-punished. However Mrs Justice McGowan said his was “intellectual arrogance†and he acted under the belief that the “rules do not apply to himâ€Â. But 7 and a half years……………….how did he manage to steal the data, why was a person on the spectrum allowed near sensitive data. If he was so gifted what were his line management doing to manage this. So much for security processes. To some degree the guy should be praised for highlighting the lack of security that enable him to compromise GCHQ systems.
On the other hand the UK fails to introduce civil or criminal penalties for the directors of boards that fail to manage cyber security risks. Cyber attacks that can compromise the security of UK CNI, or in the case of Marks and Spencer impact corporate value, and the personal lives of UK citizens.
@Thaddeus Dziekanowski Brian D. McCarthy Faisal Khan
Veritas GRC
#cybersecurity #cyberriskmanagement #cyberregulation
https://lnkd.in/e2McHRKa
View Original Post
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn%3Ali%3Ashare%3A7339594314827612160