"At least with the IRA,... they were not anxious to kill a lot of people,"
That's not what it seemed like at the time. MI5 weren't involved in day-to-day murder investigations so she might not have noticed.
40413 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
extremists trying to "knit their own crypto" and making a complete balls of it, some of them have even been reported here.
That seems to have been a typical example of "if all you have is Excel everything looks like a spreadsheet". Real cryptography algorithms are already available as libraries ready to be wrapped up in a UI. It doesn't have to be a pretty UI, just one that works. And if that hasn't already been done it's only because the commercial packages suffice for now.
"Under our current system of law, we tend to require evidence of wrongdoing before we can imprison someone."
...but just in case we'll assume everyone is guilty and put them under surveillance just in case. We'll ignore the fact that the core of strong encryption S/W went public decades ago and that there are enough tech-savvy people* amongst terrorists who will put something together entirely out of our control and even if there aren't there are others who'll do it for cash. We'll also ignore the fact that we will also be attacking British business's ability to compete in a world where security of communications is regarded as essential. We just want all your data.
*We only wish we had a few in our government.
FTFY
OK, let's look at the IT issues here:
they had had some problems with their online reservation services and had "written a bypass" – a bypass that had, it turns out, "created some anomalies."
1. They're storing card numbers which they simply shouldn't do.
2. They had problems. Why? Presumably their service had been working OK before. Did they do something to cause the problems or was it their service provider?
3. If it was their service provider why didn't they dump it on them telling them to fix it PDQ or stand for any lost business if they couldn't.
4. If it was themselves why didn't they roll back to the previous state?
5. Having written a bypass why did they release it without effective checks to make sure it worked properly and then watched over it when they rolled it out to make sure it was working properly?
6. Why, having discovered there was a problem, did they not pull the plug on it immediately?
"The hotel company showed so much bad will that the compensation needs to be much bigger than allowed by the suit imagination."
She'll undoubtedly get more as an out of court settlement plus NDA than in court. They can't afford to let it go to court. I'm sure that's all in place already which is why she's no longer answering reporters about it.
"Almost worse than that there is the deliberate delay in accepting responsibility when something goes wrong."
In this case it's even worse. According to TFA in the first place they called her and even then she had problems getting back to them. And knowing something was wrong they still kept debiting her card. OK, if they stopped taking bookings it would have cost them some business but keeping doing this knowing they were debiting the wrong account they must surely have been committing fraud. At the very least they could have started issuing credits to her account to counter each debit their system made. In fact it's difficult to find anything in this account that they did right.
It sounds as if there was nobody on watch empowered to make decisions nor any means of quickly reaching anyone who could.
"It really depends how the hotel handles such a fuckup."
As she's now not talking to the media it sounds as if an offer has been made conditional on her shutting up. However I'm sure they're discovering it's much too late. What was the hotel again - oh yes, "1 Hotel Brooklyn Bridge".
"OTOH if your current system is only SoA for the last century then you'll want to move things on sooner rather than later."
And if it's still doing what it needs to do and isn't broken you should go ahead and fix it?
"This is about mapping where the problems are, finding out what the critical chunks are that *must* be improved and then building a simpler more maintainable system to perform the task in hand. In short, building a live, functioning system that is under continuous evolution."
This. It's also easier to do as you go along. A good maxim would be to aim for a situation in which the result of each added development is that the system looks as if it were designed that way from the start.
I had a client - small business, maybe a dozen employees - who did this in the run-up to Y2K.
His servers were Xenix with a fairly old version of Informix and custom applications. He did a rip and replace with SCO and a packaged system allegedly Informix compatible; he wanted various custom tweaks adding and there were more of these over the years. Also over the years I gradually discovered various "interesting" aspects to the alleged Informix compatibility that ended up with me directly amending the data in sysindexes so they reflected the actual indexes.
When he retired he sold the business to a group who presumable ripped and replaced with whatever they ran on as a group; certainly I never heard from them.
"The way to avoid it is for management to rotate employees around different systems"
Ouch! This is how the Civil Service produces senior officials who can avoid responsibility for anything. Something goes wrong on A's watch and he immediately blames predecessor B who in turn blames predecessor C who immediately blames A and/or B.
"it is easily seen that it isn't safe to let any of your staff go until you have reached the point where the system can be rebuilt by script."
And even then, when the staff are let go you may find nobody knows what the script actually does and you will even more likely find that nobody knows why it does it.
Not only do you need to retain knowledgeable staff, you need to have succession planning in place.
Let's take a few:
"1. Not waving goodbye to a net of £13 billion of our tax money per year"
I remember the morning after the result was declared one MP who'd campaigned for Leave demanding that the government make up for the special EU funding that his constituency receives. I wonder where those special EU funds come from.
"2. Having boarders that the UK are allowed to control"
What boarders are those?
"3. The possiblity of returning to the superior British Common Law"
Are you thinking of English (and Welsh) Common Law. Scotland has its own legal system? No matter, Common Law still applies - just about. May wants to dispose of bits of it; that presumption of innocence is so inconvenient, so let's ignore it, treat everyone as guilty and spy on them.
"4. along the same lines, No EU courts overruling our own."
I'd rather like to have had the EU courts continue to overrule May's diktats.
"As I understand it one of the London attackers was reported to the anti terror hotline for his activities in his local park."
And it now turns out that he'd been investigated and the investigation dropped and also featured on a TV documentary about radicalisation.
"The same for money, it is not an unlimited resource we only have so much in circulation"
You're confusing money with the stuff it represents. Take flats and houses. There are indeed only so many at a given time. But money can be printed by governments or, in effect, by banks giving credit and the result is inflation. Apply that to the limited number of houses and you have the house price bubble that got us into this mess.
There's absolutely no way you can solve the legacy of that era by sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "La la la". That's what Brown & co did while the problem was developing.
"They were stuffed up by mistakes (to be polite - it could be called criminal fraud) the banks made, not their own."
The banks were operating within the environment created by government policy. Part of that policy was to exclude house prices from the rates of inflation used to determine interest rate policy.* The result was a long period of artificially low interest rates and a house price bubble that drove the rest of it. Surely any responsible economic manager should have looked at the situation and realised it was a threat. But the electoral advantage of cheap goods and cheap loans was too much to resist. When the inevitable happened the banks had to be baled out to fend off an even worse disaster.
*Another part was globalisation leading production to migrate to low wage areas, particularly China which reduced or held down prices of many items which were used to measure inflation.
Apart from fixing all those SQL injection flaws a good deal of this is going to hinge on a business's attitude to how it manages personal data. I can't see that as a thing that can be bought in. Except, of course, for buying in the services of those specialists in being kind to those laid off; those will be needed for the muppets from marketing who'll happily spaff all the customer data to digital marketing consultants spammers.
"Is there a legal requirement for keeping the document current?"
Very unlikely in most legislations. Would there even be a legal requirement for the document to exist? There may be a requirement if the business were ISO9000 accredited or something similar. If the latter I'd say this was a clear fail of that.