Letter to the editor

I agree with the thoughts outlined in a Letter to the editor from May 17.

The events of Sept. 11 have shown the need for greater security of all types in order to protect all organizations from disasters, acts of terror or just unforeseen events. The problems arise when security is broken into separate entities.

I frequently find that information technology security is handled separately from physical security in most organizations. This can cause several problems, as evidenced by a Computerworld article concerning security cameras at the Defense Information Systems Agency.

In this case, physical security measures introduced vulnerabilities, and even a back door, into a supposedly secure government local-area network. The problem is largely caused by the lack of communication between those security groups within the organization.

IT security and physical security are different disciplines, but they should answer to, or fall under, control/authority of a common person/directory/manager. This is especially true in government facilities, but also applies to all organizations covered by Presidential Decision Directive 63, and commercial organizations as well.

Name withheld by request

WRITE US

We welcome your comments. To send a letter to the editor, use this form.

Please check out the archive of Letters to the Editor for fellow readers' comments.

Featured

  • FCW Perspectives
    remote workers (elenabsl/Shutterstock.com)

    Post-pandemic IT leadership

    The rush to maximum telework did more than showcase the importance of IT -- it also forced them to rethink their own operations.

  • Management
    shutterstock image By enzozo; photo ID: 319763930

    Where does the TMF Board go from here?

    With a $1 billion cash infusion, relaxed repayment guidelines and a surge in proposals from federal agencies, questions have been raised about whether the board overseeing the Technology Modernization Fund has been scaled to cope with its newfound popularity.

Stay Connected