Re: SCADA
Brian Loe <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.security.firewalls.wizards |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Paul D. Robertson <[email protected]> wrote: > 1. I'm not sure "no more" fits in the definition- for instance a system > that's designed to send company email can also send personal email- how > does that make the system less reliable? > It propably - or probably should - violates the company's appropriate use policy. It may also induce a non-business reply, or forwards, which may introduce spam and viruses. >> That's not exactly true. A system that does exactly what it >> is supposed to - no more, no less - is achievable. It's not > > I'm not sure it's achievable. General purpose systems are too flexible to > be completely locked down. I can use my "Shift" key to play the Monty > Python theme, certainly not a design goal... You don't put general purpose systems on a SCADA network. They don't do email - nor do they have an email client installed. The are there to do one thing, run the SCADA application. Everything else has been removed or disabled. One could argue that you don't put general purpose systems on the corporate network either. You put accounting systems in the accounting department and HR systems in the HR department.