Zero-Day Resolution Rejected as the CISO Takes Off

Decisions 4 today

The business responds

• When the fly threw out “OT/SCADA zero-day disclosure: resolution”, OT / Grid Operations dug in its heels. Their opinion of the fly took a real knock.

  “Rejecting the disclosure again is not resolution. It is the same calendar invite, now wearing a tiny hard hat.”

  OT / Grid Operations Pushed back trust -8

  Next, they want: “Send today a narrowly scoped impact-review plan: affected assets, named reviewers, evidence sources, no production changes, and Grid Operations approval before any action or escalation.” They have already asked for a slot in the fly's diary.

• When the fly backed away from “Third-party vendor security review backlog”, Finance dug in its heels. Their opinion of the fly took a real knock.

  “Deferring the vendor review backlog during an OT disclosure is not a decision, it is a budget-shaped pause button.”

  Finance Pushed back trust -7

  Next, they want: “By 3 p.m., rank the backlog items as preserve, defer, or remove, with exposure rationale, remediation cost range, budget ceiling, and decision date.” Expect an email.

• When the fly threw out “OT/SCADA zero-day disclosure: resolution”, Legal / Compliance dug in its heels. Their opinion of the fly took a real knock.

  “Rejecting disclosure because an escape circuit fired is not a legal position. It is a future exhibit with wings.”

  Legal / Compliance Pushed back trust -10

  Next, they want: “By end of day: a written decision record, preservation notice, and counsel-reviewed notification assessment.” Expect an email.

• IT / Infrastructure heard that the fly threw out “OT/SCADA zero-day disclosure: resolution” and reached straight for a counter-offer. Their opinion of the fly took a real knock.

  “Rejected is not a resolution. Give us 30 minutes to map plant dependencies, then approve a phased containment plan that does not turn substations into ticket queues.”

  IT / Infrastructure Negotiated trust -6

  Next, they want: “A 30-minute review hold before escalation, followed by written approval for a site-by-site phased response.” Expect an email.

• When the fly sent “Phishing wave: A wave of credential-harvesting mail is hitting staff inboxes” up to the board, HR dug in its heels. Their opinion of the fly took a real knock.

  “Excellent, the Board knows. The 20,000 people receiving the emails would also enjoy a sentence on what to do.”

  HR Pushed back trust -3

  Next, they want: “Send HR the proposed employee message, approved reporting alternatives, and one sentence on how urgent field work should proceed.” Expect an email.

Diary

• OT / Grid Operations: “Request a narrowly scoped information list and review plan, with Grid Operations approving any replacement access process before board escalation.” Meeting · went ahead

  Back on day 3, OT / Grid Operations asked for a meeting with the fly about “Request a narrowly scoped information list and review plan, with Grid Operations approving any replacement access process before board escalation”, and against the odds it went ahead.

  How it went: Held. Two people attended and one of them was the fly.

• IT / Infrastructure: “Give me a 30-minute review slot and confirm whether you want the current-state map first or the phased plan.” One-to-one · dropped

  Back on day 4, IT / Infrastructure asked for a one-to-one with the fly about “Give me a 30-minute review slot and confirm whether you want the current-state map first or the phased plan”. It was postponed once, and today it quietly vanished from the calendar. Nobody has asked where it went.

• OT/SCADA zero-day disclosure: incident war-room War room · went ahead

  Only yesterday, OT / Grid Operations, IT / Infrastructure and Legal / Compliance asked for an incident war-room, and against the odds it went ahead.

  How it went: Held. Two people attended and one of them was the fly.

What each department thinks of the fly