On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net> wrote: > On 11/21/11 10:32 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote: > education / resource issue. The existing methods that have been used for > years with reasonable success in the IT industry can 'fix' this problem.
The "existing normal methods" used by much of the IT industry fail way too often, and therefore, some measure of regulation is in order, when the matter is about critical public infrastructure -- it's simply not in the public interest to let agencies fail or use slipshod/ half measure techniques that are commonly practiced by some of the IT industry. They should be required to engage in practices that can be proven to mitigate risks to a know controllable quantity. The weakness of typical IT security is probably OK, when the only danger of compromise is that an intruder might get some sensitive information, or IT might need to go to the tapes. That just won't do, when the result of compromise is, industrial equipment is forced outside of safe parameters, resulting in deaths, or a city's water supply is shut down, resulting in deaths. Hard perimeter and mushy interior with OS updates just to address known issues, and malware scanners to "try and catch" things just won't do. ..."an OS patch introduces a serious crash bug" is also a type of security issue. Patching doesn't necessarily improve security; it only helps with issues you know about, and might introduce issues you don't know about. Enumerating badness is simply not reliable, and patch patch patch is simply an example of that -- when security really matters, don't attach it to a network, especially not one that might eventually be internet connected -- indirect or not. Connection to a management LAN that has any PC on it that is or was ever internet connected "counts" as an internet connection. > Industrial Controls systems are normally only replaced when they are so old > that parts can no longer be obtained. PC's started to be widely used as > operator interfaces about the time Windows 95 came out. A lot of those > Win95 boxes are still running and have been connected to the network over > the years. The "Windows 95" part is fine. The "connected to the network" part is not fine. -- -JH