- What are other companies / products that could risk public safety if they were managed by over-networked systems (e.g., healthcare) and then hacked? What are some elements of those products that should never have access to the Internet (e.g., sacred family recipes), and those that should be carefully guarded (e.g., logins to the pasteurization sensors)? Why?
Companies selling products with potentially hazardous processes could risk public safety. Some elements that need to be watched out for being leaked are secret recipes (like Coca-Cola), privacy data, and credentials to control the system that might cause hazards. In chemical-related companies, many materials used inappropriately will cause health hazards, so if something goes wrong in the processes, it could risk public safety. For example, batteries, Nuclear, Cosmetics, and Food are chemicals related. As mentioned in the case, if the thermalization tanks, where milk is sanitized, are hacked, it will cause listeria generated without them being aware, and this could cause catastrophic damage to the brand image and hazards to the public. As for cosmetics, it closely contacts people’s skin, mouth, eyes, etc. Most cosmetic products are regulated to limit a certain amount of ingredients. If the system to add the ingredients is hacked, the amount could exceed the limitation and cause become dangerous for users using it. Other industries, like banking, defense, robots, etc., should also be concerned about over-networked systems as they hold public safety/privacy-related data and work. Still, If those sensitive data need to be put on the Internet, the companies/orgs should find a way to encode those data to prevent others from understanding the secrets and controlling the system.
- How might this discussion have gone differently had she stayed quiet, or the CEO ignored her, etc.? What would have been lost?
It is hard for people to think comprehensively. Sara’s coworkers only obey Chad’s command and are afraid to say words in the opposite direction. It is more difficult for the whole company to see the blind spot and take precautions if no one speaks up. For example, it was not until the time they visited the factory that Chad realized how much complexity the digitization initiative had created. If Sara didn’t speak up and no one else said something, the company would just follow how Frank, the security chief, and Jenny, the CFO, said to just harden the system without bringing up a sore subject to the investors. They wouldn’t have pictured the severity of the system being hacked, e.g., listeria causes health hazards. Even if the company does follow Franks’ suggestion in the end, it is still crucial to know about all the risks so that they can evaluate and change accordingly.
- What were the implicit (technical, hierarchical, gender) assumptions that she challenged, and why was it important that she did so?
The implicit technical assumption Sara challenged is that is digitalizing more the better? Do they have to digitalize the recipe? There are some risks in over-networked they didn’t expect. People were afraid to speak up and her manager apologized for her advice is a form of a hierarchical assumption that people don’t want to disobey the CEO as they are scared of being hated by the CEO. Also, the disdainful laughter coming along after Sara conveyed her thoughts came from the fact that people thought expressing a contrary opinion with the CEO was silly, and they considered that she was not senior enough to provide good insights.
