Slashdot Mirror
Bank of England Teams With New UK Cybersecurity Body (thestack.com)
An anonymous reader writes: In its first project the UK's new National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) will work with the Bank of England to produce guidelines for Britain's financial sector. The partnership will aim to bolster businesses' resilience to online threats which could damage the country's economy. The National Cyber Security Centre will seek to protect critical national infrastructure and ensure a safer online environment for UK consumers and organizations, which are increasingly threatened by crime groups, hackers and terrorists. The centre will bring together leading national cyber experts to advise on managing online security strategy.
In addition, the new centre will aim to offer more access to information relating to various cybersecurity threats, something that the GCHQ has not always been able to do since it is a secret intelligence service. The NCSC will work with both the private and public sector, acting as the focal point for communication and advice. It will be based in London and is expected to be open for business in October.
In addition, the new centre will aim to offer more access to information relating to various cybersecurity threats, something that the GCHQ has not always been able to do since it is a secret intelligence service. The NCSC will work with both the private and public sector, acting as the focal point for communication and advice. It will be based in London and is expected to be open for business in October.
And they're working really hard to weaken these systems' security because terrorism.
Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
...it's impossible to see the banking community as part of the solution, for online safety or anything else.
The book on the bailout by Neil Barofsky writes about how he was told - after the Crash - that he didn't need to check every figure in the bank's applications for bailouts because "These are *bankers*, their sacred word is their whole identity", etc, to which Barofsky could only sputter, "Have you been under a rock the last year??"
I go through periods of calming down about it, but seeing "The Big Short" this week reminded me of the overwhelming, ground-shifts-underfoot megachange that has occurred in our culture without enough comment: that "bankers" are no longer trustworthy people. Bringing them in on a problem is no longer a positive reassurance. It's as if we'd migrated from one of those countries where you want a cop to one where you avoid them if possible, because they're just criminals in uniform who will shake you down.
Instead of standing for open, fair dealings, transparency and reliability, they now stand as icons of fraud and lies. I can hardly think of anybody I would want less involved in cybersecurity than bankers. They'd be thinking about how to manipulate the solution to enhance profits and bonuses, not about me.
I don't know why the Bank of England needs "cyber security", they just rob savers of £160bn with their seven years and counting, of 0.5% interest rates. They are the biggest robbers and market fixers in the UK, they are the ones who should be in prison.
http://www.theguardian.com/mon...
Take Nobody's Word For It.
Priorities are interesting. UK could have set food, water or energy supply chains as the strategic assets that need to be protected against cyber-threats. They chose finance instead.
Is it so important to keep faith in your bank if you are under cyber siege, without electricity and drinkable water?