One chestnut from my history in lottery game development:

While our security staff was incredibly tight and did a generally good job, oftentimes levels of paranoia were off the charts.

Once they went around hot gluing shut all of the “unnecessary” USB ports in our PCs under the premise of mitigating data theft via thumb drive, while ignoring that we were all Internet-connected and VPNs are a thing, also that every machine had a RW optical drive.

  • body_by_make@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Often times you’ll find that the crazy things IT does are forced on them from higher ups that don’t know shit.

    A common case of this is requiring password changes every x days, which is a practice that is known to actively make passwords worse.

    • xkforce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The DOD was like this. And it wasn’t just that you had to change passwords every so often but the requirements for those passwords were egregious but at the same time changing 1 number or letter was enough to pass the password requirements.

    • ditty@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      For our org, we are required to do this for our cybersecurity insurance plan

      • Natanael@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Tell them NIST now recommends against it so the insurance company is increasing your risks

        • Hobo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The guideline is abundantly clear too with little room for interpretation:

          5.1.1.1 Memorized Secret Authenticators

          Verifiers SHOULD NOT impose other composition rules (e.g., requiring mixtures of different character types or prohibiting consecutively repeated characters) for memorized secrets. Verifiers SHOULD NOT require memorized secrets to be changed arbitrarily (e.g., periodically). However, verifiers SHALL force a change if there is evidence of compromise of the authenticator.

          https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-3/sp800-63b.html

  • neveraskedforthis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Banned open source software because of security concerns. For password management they require LastPass or that we write them down in a book that we keep on ourselves at all times. Worth noting that this policy change was a few months ago. After the giant breach.

    And for extra absurdity: MFA via SMS only.

    I wish I was making this up.

    • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Banning open source because of security concerns is the opposite of what they should be doing if they care about security. You can’t vet proprietary software.

      • DKP@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not about security, it’s about liability. You can’t sue OSS to get shareholders off your back.

  • Punkie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Worked a job where I had to be a Linux admin for a variety of VMs. To access them, I needed an VPN that only worked inside the company LAN, and blocked internet access. it was a 30 day trial license on day 700somthing, so it had a max 5 simultaneous connection limit. Access was from my heavily locked down laptop. Windows 7 with 5 minutes locking Screensaver. The ssh software was an unknown brand, “ssh.exe” which only allowed one connection at a time in a 80 x 24 console window with no ability to copy and paste. This went to a bastion host, an HPUx box on an old csh shell with no write access to your home directory due to a 1.4mb disk quota per user. Only one login per user, ten login max, and the bastion host was the only way to connect to the Linux VMs. Default 5 minute logout for inactivity. No ssh keys allowed. No scripting allowed, was like typing over 9600 baud.

    I quit that job. When asked why, I told them I was a Linux administrator and the job was not allowing me to administrate. I was told “a poor carpenter always blames his tools.” Yeah, fuck you.

  • Rin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Mozilla products banned by IT because they had a vulnerability in a pervious version.

    Rant

    It was so bullshit. I had Mozilla Firefox 115.1 installed, and Mozilla put out an advisory, like they do all the fucking time. Fujitsu made it out to be some huge huge unfixed bug the very next day in an email after the advisory was posted and the email chain basically said “yk, we should just remove all Firefox. It’s vulnerable so it must be removed.”

    I wouldn’t be mad if they decided that they didn’t want to have it be a managed app or that there was something (actually) wrong with it or literally anything else than the fact that they didn’t bother actually reading either fucking advisory and decided to nuke something I use daily.

    • Dicska@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Nah mate, they were completely right. What if you install an older version, and keep using it maliciously? Oh wait, now that you mention, I’m totally sure Edge had a similar problem at one point in the past. So refrain from using Edge, too. Or Explorer. And while we’re at it, it’s best to stay away from Chrome, as well. That had a similar vulnerability before, I’m sure. So let’s dish that, along with Opera, Safari, Maxthon and Netscape Navigator. Just use Lynx, it’s super lightweight!

      EDIT: on another thought, you should just have stopped working for the above reason. Nothing is safe anymore.