Home page logo
/

isn logo Information Security News mailing list archives

Re: AL Digital Acquires Second Nuclear Bunker
From: InfoSec News <isn () c4i org>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 04:29:10 -0500 (CDT)

Forwarded from: Nexus <nexus () patrol i-way co uk>

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Hansen" <davidh () spidacom co uk>
To: <ukcrypto () chiark greenend org uk>
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 3:46 PM
Subject: Re: FW: AL Digital Acquires Second Nuclear Bunker


On 1 Oct 2001 at 3:02, John Doe Number Two wrote:

PRESS RELEASE
The Bunker and The Other Bunker were designed and built during the
Cold War as physically secure communications centres. Both offer the
ultimate in protection from a myriad of attacks including; crackers,
terrorist attack, electro-magnetic pulse, HERF weapons, electronic
eavesdropping and solar flares.

Nonsense.

As someone who (in a previous career) designed, built and
maintained such buildings I'm fed up of such writing spouted by PR
companies and others.

Such a building will provide a level of protection against some of
the forms of attack listed. However, like any other form of
protection, that protection is not ultimate. The protection
provided depends on the installation design, maintenance and
operation.

For example, a terrorist attack could take many forms, groups of
people on foot for example. I doubt whether these buildings will
have troops to resist groups of attackers from getting close.
Doors (and I have seen some very impressive doors) can always be
opened with suitable tools and time, or bypassed if that is
easier. Unless the buildings are run in closed down mode all the
time (expensive on electricity and filters, not the way to attract
staff due to the limited air) a simple gas attack on the air
inlets would disable the building easily anyway.

While these buildings undoubtedly provide a far more secure
environment than the typical tin shed (with or without single-skin
block walls) that most "secure" computer spaces are inside, it is
deceitful to talk about "the ultimate protection". By all means
the company should offer the service, but they should not mis-sell
what they offer.

There is no such thing as a physically secure building. Even the
most important military headquarters in "the west", which are
still in use for their original purpose, can be destroyed by a
suitable attack.

Yes, I have pointed this out to the company before in private.


--
 David Hansen | davidh () spidacom co uk  | PGP email preferred
 Edinburgh    | CI$ number 100024,3247 | key number F566DA0E
 If I revoke this key, the only circumstance in which I will not be
 prepared to explain my reasons for doing so will be when UK
 government authorities have stipulated that providing such an
 explanation would be unlawful. See RIP Act 2000.



-
ISN is currently hosted by Attrition.org

To unsubscribe email majordomo () attrition org with 'unsubscribe isn' in the BODY
of the mail.


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]