Warning: some might get offended by some of the initial thoughts in this story. Please read till the end before you vent the frustration.
I'm also not trying to bash on Microsoft. If I were I'd have borrowed a subject of some spam message I got recently: "forget microsoft, get big and hard". I'm just trying to show how you can come from an extreme reasoning to a workable solution to protect those assets that need protection.
Suppose you defend a place that has high to very high security needs and wants to avoid the wmf thing at all cost. Reasons to do this should be based on a risk assessment, but elements that might lead to such extreme conditions might include:
Most of our readers do not have the extreme "at all cost" risk situations.
Most of us have a situation where we have a business, and the business must continue to operate. In such a business however you will identify -if you look for it- areas that might need more protection and are willing to sacrifice more for that protection than other parts of the same business. That difference in need for protection is what you can play on to do something.
E.g.: Suppose I know the accounting department was considered sensitive and due to the risk analysis performed, worthy of more extreme measures then other departments.
What could I try to do to use some of the very extreme ideas and build a safer solution for them now and in the next weeks ?
Add to that that families of nobles get their own donjon so as not to risk all nobles getting wiped out in one go should disease strike the city.
Dec 31st 2005
|Thread locked Subscribe||
Dec 31st 2005
1 decade ago