Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You've got to look at ISO27001 from the perspective of the Sales Rep, not from an Engineer.

In theory, being ISO27001 means that you're environment follows best practices and has a somewhat sane security posture.

To the business people, a new customer demands that you have ISO27001 certification before they'll sign the $$$$ contract. The salesperson does not care HOW you get the certificate, just that you have it, they need this contract signed!

The department wasn't designed with security in mind, so implementing everything required by ISO will take many months. But sales needs $$$$ now! The CEO, CFO, and CTO are aligned: money now!

So, there's high pressure to pass the audit quickly. You implement what you can, you weasle your way around the things that will take too long. Those things are "out of scope" or "testing databases". You implement MFA while the auditor is auditing, but you know it breaks developers' workflows and there isn't a quick fix, so you turn MFA back off once the audit is complete....

TA-DA! We're ISO27001 certified! But we're no more secure than we were before.



> In theory, being ISO27001 means that you're environment follows best practices and has a somewhat sane security posture.

Nah, it just means you have defined, documented processes and document that you stick to them. They actual processes can be shit and maybe you also have something on the side the auditors don't get shown, but ultimately the certification is a total joke. Source: Worked at a place that got certified despite being a security joke.


> ultimately the certification is a total joke.

Yes and no. Even if it is a joke there is one thing it qualifies: You at least spent time looking at the process. This already is a gain over complete wild west.


that makes absolutely no sense at all.

do you mean you rather be lied to than not be lied to?


That looks more like SOC2 than ISO-27001 though.


It's the same with ISO27001. A bad actor can always weasel their way through.


Engineers who are smart enough / talented enough, and who feel secure, can push back on security issues even if it will hold up a deal. This tells me that the most valuable engineers at Red Hat either do not push back enough on security concerns, or don't care enough (or aren't experienced enough) to know that the concerns exist in the first place, or they feel insecure in their position.


Ultimately, devs can't get sales reps fired, but sales reps can absolutely get devs fired.

Depending on how dysfunctional the org is, there's no super dev anywhere who can fix it. You just shut up, do bad things knowing theyre bad, or get fired.


It should be the opposite. For every big engineering issue happened because of the sales' dept pressures, the sales reps would have their asses out of any company.


When I was working in MSP land this was the worst.

I had a sales guy sell a a company a replacement for their terminal server, with OneDrive lol

I almost died laughing when he explained to me the project.

I said.. you want to run cad files off OneDrive in place of a terminal/storage server?

"Yes"

Let's just say we ended up just moving their server to the cloud and VPN access onsite and for external developers.


> [..] The CEO, CFO, and CTO are aligned: money now!

"Aligned" :)) The IT terminology FTW! Very very realistic description. Of not delivering value to customers.

Was this a case in this RH breach ? Maybe. But just putting multiple "repos" and other client stuff in same place is modern IT insanity.

At least they could put that Navy stuff somewhere else. Resonable idea, right?


100%! Insert SOC2, HIPAA, etc...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: