Ransomware Doesn’t Scare Me:
There is inherently a risk of exposure whenever you post something to the internet, whether it be something as small as a text in a conversation or something more sensitive like emailing a confidential document. Any company where users store personal data, such as social media sites, are extremely dangerous for public safety if they were to be hacked. Moreover, companies funded by some governmental source such as healthcare institutions, universities, or an intelligence agency would risk public safety because they often hold more sensitive data, such as legal information. Legal information like one’s personal government documents (social security, birth certificate, etc) or payment info should never be posted on any public site. Especially with how the future is trending towards blockware and digital currencies, ransomware will likely only become stronger in the coming years.
This is relevant to our project in that we hope to make a tool that can translate and make the complicated jargon of legal documents more comprehensible. While our product will encourage users to not post extremely sensitive information and strictly post information to be broken down, we are still very conscious about how users will interact with our project. We are also tackling questions such as if it is worth allowing users to store their broken down documents on the site to avoid a tedious rescanning process, or if an extra layer of password encryption will suffice to keep users’ data safe.
Who Invited Her?:
Had Sara not spoken up, the technology wouldn’t have gone offline and the cost of the company would have continued to be allocated towards maintaining the expensive interconnected network. I always feel like the most simple questions are the ones that are most difficult to ask, especially around a pressuring team of colleagues, because I’d assume that someone had already thought of a solution for it! But Sara posed a great point where the issue was deeply embedded in how the foundation of the project. Sensitive information was already being stored in the network from the start, and it was difficult to undo the damage without so many external factors such as having to redo code, innovate more architecture, or give off a sketchy perception to investors. But, I think that the article gave a great lesson overall in that we should undo damaging practices, in spite of their cost to make and maintain, and work towards sustainable practices. Given her environment, she had people questioning her standing in the conversation and her deputy apologizing on her behalf for her speaking up. Being the sole female voice in an ego-centric and wannabe-macho male industry set her up for so much failure. While I wouldn’t blame anyone for not speaking up in her shoes, I think that her diverse perspective is extremely important to help encourage other women and minorities to speak up in these positions and help create institutional change.
