Unique security problem - data security under fire

[MidnightWarrior]

I think we have a communication problem here.

I'll put this as clearly as I can. Local units are currently using a plethora of various shoddy web solutions, ranging from outdated and vulnerable free scripts, modified versions of existing software that never went though the proper auditing and ending with solutions that are completely inappropriate for the job. The reason for developing a central system/database is to replace all of those local ad-hoc solutions with one that is built from the ground up expressly for the specific needs of such an organization - focus is put on maximum security, privacy, constant auditing and strict limitation of access. Individual units are incapable of properly securing their data by their own. Instead of a number of sloppy and potentially dangerous solutions the idea is to replace all of those by one system that implements the level of security otherwise not attainable by individual units alone.

What I tried to make clear is that such a system serves only as a bureaucratic aid only during the time when there is no threat to speak of. Once such a threat appears the system would become a huge liability and would be taken down permanently and immediately. The immediacy and reliability of this take-down being a requirement.

On the other hand permanently and irrecoverably erasing the data present on dozens of different servers, as it is today, different software and hardware configurations by the appointed people, whose computer skills may often be insufficient, is a recipe for disaster - assuming there's still power to wipe anything off some remote commercial server.

In case it's still not perfectly clear: The server and database is a bureaucratic crutch, not a combat implement. Never was meant to be one. If you'd read my previous post with a bit more attention you'd realize that I stated that in the event of a SHTF, let me quote myself,

The event that would create the necessity of purging such a system would be the same event that would result in the activation of specific protocols, a change of standing orders and evaluating and adapting to the situation in the manner deemed the most appropriate.

I'm not at liberty to discuss the specifics of how would or how should particular situations be addressed. Neither am I the person to make those calls nor is this a place where I would engage in debates of this kind. If you feel you can't live without knowing what HQ's got planned, send me a PM and I'll direct you to the place where you can recieve whatever answer will be considered appropriate.

In addition as long as I am a law-bound citizen I don't wish to discuss lawless acts such as IED construction. As I stated previously the killswitch needs to be a device that raises no doubt as to whether it's production, posession and use is within the law.

On a sidenote, even if I personally agree with a lot of what you're saying, that means nothing.

Just to calm your fears I have never set foot on US soil and have no intention of doing so. You never know whose names might have accidentally gotten on those extraordinary rendition lists, and I feel topics like this one aren't helping.