Quote: Griff @ January 26 2009, 1:26 AM GMTBut the point is that my neighbour's dodgy brother-in-law probably can't break into my house without a warrant.
Sure he can; burglars don't worry about obtaining warrants. But people with cushy government jobs do, so they'll keep their secrets to themselves if they've been sworn to secrecy and understand that they'll rot in prison if they run their mouths.
Again the human component not having those databases is not only limiting it's crippling to many areas of civil life and it costs lives.
A technological solution or a reduction in the size of these databases only slows the problem down a little.
The question is how do we recruit and retain, loyal trust worthy staff?
Even if the passport office used paper records an industrious crook with a camera phone could gain reams of information.
Quote: Griff @ January 26 2009, 1:30 AM GMT1) Who has access? ANY FUCKER WHO CAN GET THROUGH A "JOB INTERVIEW" WITHOUT ACTUALLY SOILING THEMSELVES
2) How will said access be monitored? BY THE SAME CHUMPS WHO MONITOR ALL THE DATA THE UK GOVERNMENT HAVE LOST SO FAR
3) What are the penalties for unauthorized access? DISMISSAL FROM A SHITTY JOB YOU PROBABLY HATE ANYWAY, AND WERE ONLY DOING SO YOU COULD LOOK UP DODGY INFO FOR YOUR MATES IN THE PUB, AND ANYWAY YOU PROBABLY WON'T GET CAUGHT GIVEN THE EFFICIENCY OF MOST GOVERNMENT IT DEPARTMENTS
Sounds like your government needs to step up its enforcement. I'm legally forbidden for life to divulge secrets I learned more than 20 years ago while in the military.
Quote: Griff @ January 26 2009, 1:32 AM GMTI kind of meant he couldn't legally break into my house without a warrant unlike the people Sooty described.
Actually if he was a bailif and your council tax payment was a week or so late he could and have a poke around.
And if you resist he can restrain you.
Thanks Jaqui Spliff for increasing the powers of bailifs in the recession nice to know who's side you're really on.
Actually if he works for the gas board, RSPCA and a fair few others he can have a thorough poke.
Quote: sootyj @ January 26 2009, 1:32 AM GMTEven if the passport office used paper records an industrious crook with a camera phone could gain reams of information.
Truly sensitive information is contained within areas where mobile phones, cameras and thumb drives are prohibited, if your government has any sort of security in place at all.
Quote: Griff @ January 26 2009, 1:30 AM GMT1) Who has access? ANY FUCKER WHO CAN GET THROUGH A "JOB INTERVIEW" WITHOUT ACTUALLY SOILING THEMSELVES
2) How will said access be monitored? BY THE SAME CHUMPS WHO MONITOR ALL THE DATA THE UK GOVERNMENT HAVE LOST SO FAR
3) What are the penalties for unauthorized access? DISMISSAL FROM A SHITTY JOB YOU PROBABLY HATE ANYWAY, AND WERE ONLY DOING SO YOU COULD LOOK UP DODGY INFO FOR YOUR MATES IN THE PUB, AND ANYWAY YOU PROBABLY WON'T GET CAUGHT GIVEN THE EFFICIENCY OF MOST GOVERNMENT IT DEPARTMENTS
That's interesting we are in total agreement on this. The level of control and access staff in agency posts get is scary.
And frankly when MI5 pays 15 grand a year, who the hell do they think is going to join?
Osama Bin Laden and Walter Mitty.
Quote: DaButt @ January 26 2009, 1:36 AM GMTTruly sensitive information is contained within areas where mobile phones, cameras and thumb drives are prohibited, if your government has any sort of security in place at all.
Oh dear no it isn't. Any way look at Mordecai Vanunu for proof over how security always fails.
Quote: Griff @ January 26 2009, 1:37 AM GMTAgain with the silly emotional blackmail.
No one is suggesting keeping medical records away from surgeons.
But keeping my bank details away from local council busybodies does not cost lives and might even save theirs if my 47% chance of going postal kicks off one day.
On this just thinking of work situations I've been in, no intent to emotionally blackmail. The lousy state of government data systems really do hurt the day to day work. And there's hearty opposition to medical data bases, it's amongst the strongest.
Quote: DaButt @ January 26 2009, 1:30 AM GMTBut people with cushy government jobs do, so they'll keep their secrets to themselves if they've been sworn to secrecy and understand that they'll rot in prison if they run their mouths.
Oh DaButt. Either your country DOES work particularly differently to ours, or you have far too high a level of confidence in governments. The passage I've quoted could have easily come out of the mouth of one of our Government's ministers, albeit in a particularly blunt mood. It's so idealistic, disconnected from reality, and ultimately, bollocks.
It seems to me that the government is rarely the bad guy in most cases. They may be lax as far as security goes - and it should be improved, but individuals, organizations and foreign governments are the ones using the data for nefarious purposes.
Professional culture in many areas of government employment seems to be in a terminal state of decline. I'm fairly sure most Police officers don't abuse the PNC, and I don't feel that way about plastic plods and traffic wardens.
Quote: Griff @ January 26 2009, 1:37 AM GMTBut keeping my bank details away from local council busybodies does not cost lives and might even save theirs if my 47% chance of going postal kicks off one day.
Quote: DaButt @ January 26 2009, 1:33 AM GMTSounds like your government needs to step up its enforcement. I'm legally forbidden for life to divulge secrets I learned more than 20 years ago while in the military.
This country is f**king useless when it comes to law enforcement and punishments. I assume you read about Karen Matthews? 8 years. 8 f**king years. AND she'll be out in 3. Utter f**king shambles.
Actually Vanunu is probably proof that no data is ever truly secure, maybe we should just be honest and open all the time?
Quote: DaButt @ January 26 2009, 1:44 AM GMTIt seems to me that the government is rarely the bad guy in most cases.
You've not lived under the Jock regime.
Quote: Aaron @ January 26 2009, 1:47 AM GMT
This country is f**king useless when it comes to law enforcement and punishments. I assume you read about Karen Matthews? 8 years. 8 f**king years. AND she'll be out in 3. Utter f**king shambles.
Yes but she'll be doing her sentence in a divan bed.
Quote: Aaron @ January 26 2009, 1:42 AM GMTOh DaButt. Either your country DOES work particularly differently to ours, or you have far too high a level of confidence in governments.
There are literally millions of people in this country who hold security clearances or have held them in the past. They endured months or years of background investigations and they are/were very well-briefed when it comes to the punishment for unlawful disclosure of classified information. The few leaks that surface are usually intentionally released for political purposes.