More on the Airbus Presentation
August Jackson left a great comment on the earlier post on Airbus's internal presentation on Boeings challenges with the 787 and I think it's worth posting his comment separately here: This is an interesting development, and it will indeed be very interesting to see how this plays out. As an aside on search techniques, the approach that I suggest to
better evaluate the presence of proprietary information posted to the
web by a company is to use the "site:" operator to designate a
company's domain name as the limitation for your search. Also to use
the "filetype:" operator to designate in Google (Yahoo follows the same
syntax) that you want the search engine to search for Powerpoint files.
So in this instance I ran a Google search for "+Proprietary
filetype:ppt site:boeing.com." I found two results. One includes a mention of proprietary data.
Another is a PowerPoint file describing Boeing's intention to protest
the Air Force fuel tanker award that received so much attention this
past Spring (AIrbus won and the award was cancelled over claims of
improper evaluation methodology). One unknown is a difference between what was on the Boeing site and
what is on the Boeing site today. It's not inconceivable that Boeing
employees could have realized proprietary data was exposed and took the
information down. Another unknown is what information Airbus employees might have
found using the "robots.txt" file on the Boeing site that tells search
engines such as Google not to index certain files or pages on the site.
The current robots.txt file on the Boeing site does not appear to limit
search engines indexing of any content on the site. In no circumstances am I suggesting that Boeing did anything to
clean up their site. Only that it is within the realm of possibility
that they could have done any of these things to close gaps that might
have existed before. It's also conceivable that Airbus employees
applied search methods more advanced (and potentially more intrusive)
than my own. Again, not saying they did-- just that it is within the
realm of possibility. Many companies post information market "Proprietary and
Confidential" to their public web sites. Companies in every industry.
Fortune 500 (100, 50) companies that should have information security
professionals that should know better. As CI professionals an important
question is whether or not we are obliged to respect the privacy
markings of competitors' documents that are posted and available on
their public web site. Another dimension of the problem in the corporate world is the
over-reliance of Proprietary information markings. One of the principal
concepts of information protection is that to protect everything is to
protect nothing. In this environment it is a crap-shoot, and trade
secrets are put at risk through haphazard application of the security
frameworks that are intended to protect that very and truly proprietary
information.
