Educause Security Discussion mailing list archives
Re:
From: Gary Dobbins <dobbins () ND EDU>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:36:57 -0500
Maybe this is too flippant, maybe not, depending on your environment, but isn't it all about the data? If the person doesn't handle any protected or sensitive data then they may not need encryption. So, if he doesn't want to encrypt, no problem, he just can't have any of the above data on his system. Maybe that's a practical option for him; to just use a kiosk or a co-worker for submitting student grades. After all, encryption is to cover the case where University or protected data fall out of his control along with the machine. If they're not in his possession, the machine is just a toaster - buy a new one if lost. See, I knew it would sound flip. From: Mclaughlin, Kevin (mclaugkl) [mailto:mclaugkl () UCMAIL UC EDU] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 12:15 PM To: SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU Subject: [SECURITY] Hi All: I am having a bit of a tussle with a faculty member who is on one of the committees that already approved UC having a Full Disk Encryption Policy. I won't overload you with the verbose emails that have gone back and forth but it seems that his concern is summed up in that he doesn't want a policy for this as that makes it mandatory and he is making some grandiose blanket statements about the impact to faculty if we have a Full Disk Encryption policy in place. (see below) The policy basically says: all PCs that store restricted data (FERPA, HIPAA, GLB, PCI) will be encrypted with PGP's full disk encryption software at no cost to the individual or department. This software will be supported, as needed, by Central IT. Hi Kevin Encouraging FDE (full disk encryption) is fine. Mandating it - is not. Regarding your comment that "My profession is all about Risk mgt and mitigation". That is the trouble with the policy. Faculty teach, do research, etc. The policy needs to strike a balance. In years past, we had similar discussions about libraries. To protect the books, libraries should simply close their doors. A balance needs to found. The goal of the policy should be to assist professors to follow the law while they do their job. Here's my question: I have talked about how transparent the tool is, my team and I have used it for about 6 months now; I have talked about how as an adjunct I found it easy to use, and I have talked about how this IS a tool that allows faculty to do their job and to safeguard information at the same time. I have also offered to let him try the tool and he has not taken me up on that. The net result I have had is nill. Have any of you had success with a technique to overcome this type of obstacle? I have no doubt that the policy will be approved and moved forward but I would also like to get this very vocal faculty member's support if possible. Thanks, -Kevin Kevin L. McLaughlin CISM, CISSP, PMP, ITIL Master Certified Director, Information Security University of Cincinnati 513-556-9177 (w) 513-703-3211 (m) 513-558-ISEC (department) UC-Logo-800 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and its content is confidential, intended solely for the addressee, and may be legally privileged. Access to this message and its content by any individual or entity other than those identified in this message is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying or distribution of this e-mail may be unlawful. Any action taken or omitted due to the content of this message is prohibited and may be unlawful.
Current thread:
- Re: Gary Dobbins (Dec 17)