Skip to main content

Back to (new) Basics

To maintain secure computer systems, in the past the basics have been tasks like keep systems updated, run anti-virus software, use a properly configured firewall,use a filtering proxy for access to the internet.

The advice on basics has been mechanistic in the past - make the machinery protect itself was the ideal and most hoped-for outcome.

The new Basics include the old things and add:

  • Establish a Security Culture
  • Maintain Good Computer Habits 
  • Plan for the Unexpected
  • Control Access to Protected Health Information

(from Top 10 Tips for Cybersecurity in Health Care)

What's interesting about the new Basics is the additional items all have something in common: People. Each item focuses on how people interact with the systems, what they should expect and look for in terms of benefits, risks and dangers, and the fact the use of computers and computerized machinery must always remember the human elements for mistake, misuse and out-right abuse.

Why Is Cybersecurity So Hard? puts it succinctly, attributing it to three reasons. The first reason is that which is being recognized more broadly now: It's not just a technical problem.  Harvard Business Review's The Best Cybersecurity Investment You Can Make Is Better Training documents the problem. The Small Business Administration is gearing up to help in the effort to train small and medium sized businesses and  the AHA is making efforts at training from the top-down and this includes training on and in governance efforts.

It's people that are trying to defeat security, it will come down to people promoting security - as the new Best Practices warrant.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Unit Testing - What to Test

This I wrote to answer a question that came up when we were discussing our software process and I was training developers on how to unit test. It seems a simple enough question, but I kept pondering it and delving deeper until I realized I needed to write this monograph. What unit tests should we write? How do we know what to test? Ideally, unit tests should cover every path through the code. It should be your chance to see every path through your code works as expected and as needed. If you are practicing Test Driven Development then it's implied everything gets a test. In the real world, you might not be allowed to test everything - for instance, if the testing suite ends up taking a week to run, then the world will have changed by the time it finishes and the test results will be obsolete. Unit testing at it's basic is testing an object, a method - the smallest unit of your code that it can test independently. It should test the inputs "goes into" an...
Post a Comment
Read more

Healthcare and Health Informatics Glossary

Here is a glossary of terms useful in Healthcare and Health Informatics ACO (Accountable Care Organization) MEDICARE’s outcomes-based contracting approach Arden Syntax an approach to specifying medical knowledge and clinical decision support rules in a form that is independent of any EHR and thus sharable across hospitals ARRA (American Recovery and Reconstruction Act) the Obama administration’s 2009 economic stimulus bill Blue Button an ASCII text based standard for heath information sharing first introduced by the Veteran’s Administration to facilitate access to records stored in VistA by their patients. The newer Blue Button + format provides both human and machine readable formats. CCD (Continuity of Care Document) an XML-based patient summary based on the CDA architecture CCOW (Clinical Context Object Workshop) an HL7 standard for synchronizing and coordinating applications to automatically follow the patient, user (and other) contexts to allow the clinical u...
2 comments
Read more

It's all broken...

So, Scott Hanselman struck a chord again:  Everything's broken and nobody's upset . The worst part is I can see that I'm part of the problem on both sides . I've excused many problems with software - shrugging as I restart the software or reboot. I save my anger for those occasions where I fell I've lost serious work and substantial time. Other than that I accept problems, glitches, crashes as "the cost of doing business". I believe it's actually because I've amused myself and earned a living creating software, that I am able to accept what's often pitiable quality. I've spent time working on systems that are not much more than breadboards with wires cascading from it, where getting something, anything to work was a huge accomplishment. But that was then and this is now. No way would I put up with a car that suffers from numerous small problems as today's software can. And putting these two thoughts together, it's now frightening ...
2 comments
Read more