Why is it the governments problem to provide furlough pay if a company takes inadequate steps to protect their networks?
radiant_0wl on
> “Workers in the JLR supply chain must not be made to pay the price for the cyber attack,” she added.
Let’s accept that argument but why then should taxpayers face that cost for a private company?
Will furlough be cheaper than offering the existing support via universal benefit etc? I doubt it.
FlaviousTiberius on
This country subsidises a lot of these businesses in general, not just in this case but many paying low wages only being able to do so because the government tops it up with UC.
AttitudeSimilar9347 on
The price of this must be the UK gov acquiring all assets for £1 wiping out all shareholders, otherwise no deal (same as it should have been for the banks)
Lynex_Lineker_Smith on
No they fucking well haven’t . Source ; Brother works at Whitley in this department.
Cowsgobaaah on
Tax payers bailing out private companies…….. again
mancunian101 on
Sorry but it’s not the countries responsibility to cover for an employer that suffers a hack or anything similar.
JLR should be covering this as it’s their responsibility and their fault that their systems got hacked.
Piod1 on
This is what happens when dealership greed runs rampant in the face of cyber security issues. Having to have your tools plugged in to the network just in case Joe bloggs finds a cheaper part and can do it themselves . Coded ancillaries to cut out third party manufacturers are laughable in the face of the number one most stolen vehicle by the same measure they claim is for our protection and security.
EntireFishing on
I’ve worked on IT for 27 years and I guarantee JLR had old servers, poor security, local admin users, employees who can use Windows to do anything outside open Edge, no network isolation. And they relied on 3rd party Anti Virus provider and contracts backing off the problem to someone else.
Standard procedure for most businesses. IT is all cost cost cost. Well now it’s going to end JLR. I don’t see them coming back
9 commenti
Why is it the governments problem to provide furlough pay if a company takes inadequate steps to protect their networks?
> “Workers in the JLR supply chain must not be made to pay the price for the cyber attack,” she added.
Let’s accept that argument but why then should taxpayers face that cost for a private company?
Will furlough be cheaper than offering the existing support via universal benefit etc? I doubt it.
This country subsidises a lot of these businesses in general, not just in this case but many paying low wages only being able to do so because the government tops it up with UC.
The price of this must be the UK gov acquiring all assets for £1 wiping out all shareholders, otherwise no deal (same as it should have been for the banks)
No they fucking well haven’t . Source ; Brother works at Whitley in this department.
Tax payers bailing out private companies…….. again
Sorry but it’s not the countries responsibility to cover for an employer that suffers a hack or anything similar.
JLR should be covering this as it’s their responsibility and their fault that their systems got hacked.
This is what happens when dealership greed runs rampant in the face of cyber security issues. Having to have your tools plugged in to the network just in case Joe bloggs finds a cheaper part and can do it themselves . Coded ancillaries to cut out third party manufacturers are laughable in the face of the number one most stolen vehicle by the same measure they claim is for our protection and security.
I’ve worked on IT for 27 years and I guarantee JLR had old servers, poor security, local admin users, employees who can use Windows to do anything outside open Edge, no network isolation. And they relied on 3rd party Anti Virus provider and contracts backing off the problem to someone else.
Standard procedure for most businesses. IT is all cost cost cost. Well now it’s going to end JLR. I don’t see them coming back