where I work people are trying their best but dealing with complex systems, memories, and methods of communication. because of this, security issues are sometimes missed, sometimes poorly communicated, and sometimes poorly remediated.
where I work people are trying their best but dealing with complex systems, memories, and methods of communication. because of this, security issues are sometimes missed, sometimes poorly communicated, and sometimes poorly remediated.
Fwiw, I've ended up being "middle management" at a large company, with deep technical background, and I'm trained and incentivized to report, escalate, inform, communicate, share, and otherwise ensure its addressed up the bloody wazoo. I get slapped on the hand for not communicating / informing enough, never for communicating too much. Over 2 decades, I've never seen my executives try to cover something. "Manage the narrative", sure, but that's largely about how they craft a sentence, not about not reporting.
However, I have also witnessed corporate culture in other places (as embedded consultant) where each layer is terrified of layer above, and each layer is heavily punished for reporting "bad news". They were institutionally set up to fail project deployment as risks are not escalated and they proudly plunge forward. They're not sure much top-down knowingly obstructed to hide stuff, as much as electroshock therapied that it's a bad experience. Taking the most cursory log at the most basic logs and saying "whee, no evidence of exploit!!" Would be par for the course :-/
Hiding something often takes years to uncover and by then management has moved on, maybe even to their second company!
As a non-lawyer, that sure sounds like sketchy advice, even beyond the rest.
Right, but how so? A person or company can get into trouble with things being written down or made known to others. Having a lawyer consider it first is legally prudent and is entirely reasonable and common advice given out to any person (don't speak to police/regulator/other party/internet/newspaper/etc before consulting your lawyer). If you think that's ethically sound advice for a person, then what changes the calculus for a corporation?
> and maybe not the best strategy for the individual if they're being instructed to keep information to themselves instead of passing it up the chain in the company. Is that intended to keep just that employee responsible for whatever mess?
Probably less instructed to keep it to yourself, more encouraged to stick to "official" reporting channels, and then when you do that or come into contact with such issues by other means, more encouragement to use the phone.
And it completely depends on what it is as to the intention I guess. Initially so that the lawyers are able to consider and advise. But sure you aren't paying the lawyer so they are only taking care of your interests so far as that coincides with the company's interests. So if you had a concern that you would be responsible for a legal problem, or are a victim of a criminal or civil legal matter from the company or another person in it, then I would say you should consider discussing that with your own lawyer.