|
|
|
|
|
by celticninja
398 days ago
|
|
You have an incomplete understanding of the situation. The services that have been affected are 3rd party systems, built by the private sector on a government contract. The service was built by people who were not going to support it. It is not possible to upgrade and patch these services. The civil servant developers working on them do what they can, but they have been warming management, who have warned government, that they systems are insecure, but govt won't spend money on updating them. There are services built by civil servant developers, that are built with security in mind, and they are not affected by this breach. So it's nothing to do with being paid peanuts, or not wanting to do the best job possible. It's very easy to backseat drive and offer opinions but your opinion is based on a fallacy. |
|
Makes sense. So if i’m understanding this right, the fault basically lies with the decision maker(s) in government who said “nope, not worth paying $x to secure/maintain our systems”
Sounds to me like they shouldn’t be allowed to create these public facing systems in the first place if they can’t afford (or don’t want to) maintain them. no?
That would be like paying someone to build a bridge for you and then deciding to purposely ignore maintenance on the bridge when the experts warn you it needs maintenance.