Databases on removable drives

[Jonathan Hutchins]

On Friday 16 November 2007 11:41:09 Leo Mauler wrote:

> So what you are saying is that they think that a
> network is more easily compromised than a physical
> security "sneakernet"?  Seems it *is* a security back
> door they're concerned about.

They can see a safe.  They understand what a safe represents.  The fact that 
the whole safe might be removable might completely escape them, or they may 
take measures to prevent this as well.

> Its not a bad plan, provided you spend the money
> keeping the employees locked in the office with both
> the hard drive safe and the workstations while both
> are in use.  

The employees are expected to follow the rules.  The reasoning is that while 
they have custody of the data, it is their responsibility to protect it 
properly.  It's when the data is no longer the focus of attention that the 
need to lock it in the safe comes into play.  Employees have been the weak 
link in the system before, but the objective is to make sure the rest of the 
system does not contain the weak link.

Clearly the system isn't flawless, but there it is.