In message <[log in to unmask]>, Paul Miller
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>> From: Colin J Browne <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: Paul Miller <[log in to unmask]>, gp-
>[log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Select Committee Report
>> Priority: normal
>
>> The NWCS has a subgroup which is looking at encryption of messages in
>> view of the discussions with the BMA. Yes tehy are trying. The BT
>> Syntegra NHSnet has a secure gateway to the internet which would allow
>> access to all your favourite sites such as GP-UK. This would be part of
>> the connection deal to NHSnet.
>
>
>Is this not meant to be "one way" gateway, thus essentially
>restricting it's use. For example, presumably I couldn't download
>files by ftp although I could upload ; although I could post to
>newsgroups, I couldn't receive. What does "Secure gateway" actually
>mean ? The point stands that if we are forced to take all our internet content
>through one ISP which is monitoring what we do and what we receive,
>we will be paying higher prices for a lesser service. Also, what
>about BBSs and big BBSs like Compuserve etc. Will we get access to
>them ?
I'm also getting a bit confused here.Is the restriction on the
_organisation_ or on the individual? Would my connection to the NHS at
the practice prevent me from surfing the net from my home computer -
which is not linked to the practice - yet - and if it does, has anyone
thought of a way of preventing all the employees in the NHS from
accesssing the WWW from their home computers? Would this apply to other
occupants ie kids?
I have doubts about accessing the NHS from the practice computer...let
alone the WWW!
When you're talking about BBSs, what are you thinking of?
>
>I remain, overall, a little confused by the many issues here.
>Security seems to be a priority to all concerned, but it seems to be
>being addressed from the wrong angle (alarmingly), and by taking what
>increasingly
>seems like an unworkable and restrictive method of managing it we are
>likely to create something of limited value, with as many
>disadvantages as advantages.
Security obviously is a priority - but - what do you mean by security?
If you are talking (as the DOH appears to be) about threats from outside
the NHS, the banning of links to the WWW seems reasonable - possibly ..
If, on the other hand, you accept that the major threat in any large
organisation comes from insiders (Ross?), it seems almost irrelevant.
Could anyone tell me - I thought the whole point of encryption was to be
able to send confidential material safely over unsafe networks. If you
have secure encryption, does it matter whether or not you are connected
to the WWW ? Am I missing something?
Mary
--
Mary Hawking
Kingsbury Court Surgery
Church Street
Dunstable
Beds LU5 4RS
tel:01582 601289 (home)
01582 663218 (surgery)
fax:01582 476488 (surgery)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
