A thousand people who work for Twitter, some of them third party employees, have that sort of access, to one of the most used platforms in the world that also functions as the press engine of the...
The former employees familiar with Twitter security practices said that too many people could have done the same thing, more than 1,000 as of earlier in 2020, including some at contractors like Cognizant.
A thousand people who work for Twitter, some of them third party employees, have that sort of access, to one of the most used platforms in the world that also functions as the press engine of the United States Government. Why?
This is precisely the type of questions a devil's advocate should be asking regarding security every step of the way. That would require a person having that job and asking those questions. Then...
Why?
This is precisely the type of questions a devil's advocate should be asking regarding security every step of the way.
That would require a person having that job and asking those questions. Then that person's concerns would have to change workflow roadmaps as they're being designed.
These types of organizing things are an established part of all traditional infrastructure and their control systems. If more large tech companies saw the value of hiring traditional experts from related fields, surely they'd get a huge competitive advantage.
I work in networking. Almost all large fiber/networking/suppliers have folks like this who made their careers in electricity or water supply etc. They add tremendous value by having worked decades with these sorts of thoughts in mind.
Much as I'd like this to be true, I don't know that I believe it. The rest of what you say is spot on, but how much has this really hurt Twitter? How much have major breaches hurt Equifax, or...
surely they'd get a huge competitive advantage
Much as I'd like this to be true, I don't know that I believe it. The rest of what you say is spot on, but how much has this really hurt Twitter? How much have major breaches hurt Equifax, or Marriott?
I think there's still some hope of the EU levying fines so brutal that the rest of the industry has to sit up and take notice, but until that happens it seems like post hoc damage limitation is the order of the day.
We specifically get a bunch of clients due to security ("dumb pipes"-people get what they pay for). I know that to be true exactly the same way for companies with intellectual property that have...
We specifically get a bunch of clients due to security ("dumb pipes"-people get what they pay for).
I know that to be true exactly the same way for companies with intellectual property that have company communication platforms etc.
Security and encryption was the main reason gmail was adopted so much by companies back in the day. That essentially killed off yahoo, hotmail etc. as significant competition.
For us as individuals, we pay dearly for cheap services that skimp out on security in ways that just isn't normal in the corporate world.
In tech (and most other fields), the largest profit margins are also in b2b, not sales to private consumers. Social media is an exception and their lack of security show how that warps their incentives.
Who in their right mind would trust a free VPN? What are you paying with when you use Twitter or Facebook, or submitting resumes for free on Linked-in?
I completely agree with you. The fines need to be so big that customer privacy is taken seriously and warped security concerns today are unwarped. I think that's the only way it'll happen. Networking effects of everyone using something is just too hard to undo. the behemoths are so much larger than the Myspaces and Diggs of a decade ago.
Why? Because that's apparently the number of people needed to manage 300+ million active accounts. I'm not saying this is a great situation, but how is that number surprising?
Why? Because that's apparently the number of people needed to manage 300+ million active accounts. I'm not saying this is a great situation, but how is that number surprising?
A thousand people who work for Twitter, some of them third party employees, have that sort of access, to one of the most used platforms in the world that also functions as the press engine of the United States Government. Why?
This is precisely the type of questions a devil's advocate should be asking regarding security every step of the way.
That would require a person having that job and asking those questions. Then that person's concerns would have to change workflow roadmaps as they're being designed.
These types of organizing things are an established part of all traditional infrastructure and their control systems. If more large tech companies saw the value of hiring traditional experts from related fields, surely they'd get a huge competitive advantage.
I work in networking. Almost all large fiber/networking/suppliers have folks like this who made their careers in electricity or water supply etc. They add tremendous value by having worked decades with these sorts of thoughts in mind.
Much as I'd like this to be true, I don't know that I believe it. The rest of what you say is spot on, but how much has this really hurt Twitter? How much have major breaches hurt Equifax, or Marriott?
I think there's still some hope of the EU levying fines so brutal that the rest of the industry has to sit up and take notice, but until that happens it seems like post hoc damage limitation is the order of the day.
We specifically get a bunch of clients due to security ("dumb pipes"-people get what they pay for).
I know that to be true exactly the same way for companies with intellectual property that have company communication platforms etc.
Security and encryption was the main reason gmail was adopted so much by companies back in the day. That essentially killed off yahoo, hotmail etc. as significant competition.
For us as individuals, we pay dearly for cheap services that skimp out on security in ways that just isn't normal in the corporate world.
In tech (and most other fields), the largest profit margins are also in b2b, not sales to private consumers. Social media is an exception and their lack of security show how that warps their incentives.
Who in their right mind would trust a free VPN? What are you paying with when you use Twitter or Facebook, or submitting resumes for free on Linked-in?
I completely agree with you. The fines need to be so big that customer privacy is taken seriously and warped security concerns today are unwarped. I think that's the only way it'll happen. Networking effects of everyone using something is just too hard to undo. the behemoths are so much larger than the Myspaces and Diggs of a decade ago.
Why? Because that's apparently the number of people needed to manage 300+ million active accounts. I'm not saying this is a great situation, but how is that number surprising?
Why do all of them need God access though? That seems like a disaster waiting to happen, because it did.