Alan Bell Against Id Cards?

[Cronky]

It's a good analogy of the NIR.

[guardone]

"Your confidence is misplaced". said ANS, about the IOM post office being a state agent.

 

Do you believe that if a branch of the uk government eg MI 5, wanted to know what what was in the next parcel you receive, even from an inter island source, they would not actually open it and look?? If so, I think you have not read up on their abilities and influence. There is a joint customs agreement and they could use its provisions to examine anything. There may be a legal problem, but not a practical one. I doubt there is a law forbidding them to know. You would not know. Xrays are commonly used in the UK post office, there is probably provision within the IOM.

Unless you work at a high level in the post office, and can tell us where I am wrong?

[ans]

I think you...... they could..... There may be...... there is probably....... I am wrong?

 

You don't sound so sure of yourself really.

[Albert Tatlock]

Do you believe that if a branch of the uk government eg MI 5, wanted to know what what was in the next parcel you receive, even from an inter island source, they would not actually open it and look?? If so, I think you have not read up on their abilities and influence. There is a joint customs agreement and they could use its provisions to examine anything. There may be a legal problem, but not a practical one. I doubt there is a law forbidding them to know. You would not know. Xrays are commonly used in the UK post office, there is probably provision within the IOM.

Unless you work at a high level in the post office, and can tell us where I am wrong?

I think you'll find the opening of parcels and letters (Post Office or Courier services) are covered under the interception of communications act, and that the intelligence services (including the military) have a remit to operate on the island as required anyway.

[Ushtey]

Why not just write everyone's details down in one great big book, give to one person, then whenever you want to check anything, just give them a call.

 

If any information leaks out, you know who to blame, there's only one person to security check, the data's all in one place and with a premium rate phone number it would pay for itself.

 

You're taking the piss, right?

 

Yep.

 

But worryingly I can't help thinking that it would be more secure (and probably less likely to fail) than any electronic database. It should be a standard test against any new database - will the electronic database prvide something significantly better than a paper based version.

 

But then again, using paper to record details, what kind of craziness is that. Next thing you know we'll be storing people's telephone numbers and addresses in a big paper book.

[Grianane]

Why not just write everyone's details down in one great big book, give to one person, then whenever you want to check anything, just give them a call.

 

If any information leaks out, you know who to blame, there's only one person to security check, the data's all in one place and with a premium rate phone number it would pay for itself.

 

You're taking the piss, right?

 

Yep.

 

But worryingly I can't help thinking that it would be more secure (and probably less likely to fail) than any electronic database. It should be a standard test against any new database - will the electronic database prvide something significantly better than a paper based version.

 

But then again, using paper to record details, what kind of craziness is that. Next thing you know we'll be storing people's telephone numbers and addresses in a big paper book.

 

Thats brilliant

[Cambon]

Why not just write everyone's details down in one great big book, give to one person, then whenever you want to check anything, just give them a call.

 

If any information leaks out, you know who to blame, there's only one person to security check, the data's all in one place and with a premium rate phone number it would pay for itself.

 

You're taking the piss, right?

 

Yep.

 

But worryingly I can't help thinking that it would be more secure (and probably less likely to fail) than any electronic database. It should be a standard test against any new database - will the electronic database prvide something significantly better than a paper based version.

 

But then again, using paper to record details, what kind of craziness is that. Next thing you know we'll be storing people's telephone numbers and addresses in a big paper book.

 

Good point.

 

I personally think database security is a pointless argument. The IT people will always be looking for a software type of solution and will never admit that anything else will do. This is mainly because the IT people always think logically rarely laterally.

 

The non IT side often think laterally and usually don't understand the software solutions that the IT side can provide.

 

The two will never agree. But my point about auditors and keeping IT people away from data is correct. Many of the biggest fraud cases of the past 20 years have been committed by or involved programmers of one sort or another.

[ai_Droid]

The two will never agree. But my point about auditors and keeping IT people away from data is correct. Many of the biggest fraud cases of the past 20 years have been committed by or involved programmers of one sort or another.

 

It's a fairly standard practice to not allow programmers access to your live environment. Most audit and risk depts in a well regulated organisation will insist on it and regularly test.

 

No clue what you're talking about in the rest of your post though, can anyone translate?

[ans]

We're not having tandem thread of this shit. Take this discussion to this one please.

 

http://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php...=21575&st=0