Phishing Wave Flies Upward to the Board

Decisions 4 today

The business responds

• OT / Grid Operations heard that the fly wanted more information on “Regulatory audit: evidence gathering” and refused, loudly enough to be heard two floors down. They cooled on the fly a little.

  “Demanding more information is reasonable. Demanding it without naming the evidence, reviewers, or deadline is just grooming with stationery.”

  OT / Grid Operations Pushed back trust -1

  Next, they want: “Send the narrowly scoped audit review plan today, including affected assets, evidence sources, named reviewers, and confirmation that Grid Operations approves any action or escalation.” They have already asked for a slot in the fly's diary.

• When the fly wanted more information on “Regulatory audit: evidence gathering”, Legal / Compliance dug in its heels. They cooled on the fly a little.

  “Demanding more information is reasonable. Calling the bitterness channel a decision framework is not something I can put in an audit file.”

  Legal / Compliance Pushed back trust -1

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

• When the fly wanted more information on “Regulatory audit: evidence gathering”, Finance dug in its heels. They cooled on the fly a little.

  ““More information” remains an invoice-shaped fog. Send the exact evidence list, owners, cost range, budget ceiling, and decision date.”

  Finance Pushed back trust -1

  Next, they want: “Provide the audit evidence inventory, mandatory deadlines, estimated internal and external costs, budget ceiling, and decision date.” Expect an email.

• When the fly sent “Phishing wave: A wave of credential-harvesting mail is hitting staff inboxes” up to the board, IT / Infrastructure agreed in principle, then started haggling over every detail. They warmed to the fly, very slightly.

  “I can support a board heads-up, provided we label this evidence gathering, not an outage, and avoid promising controls that do not exist yet.”

  IT / Infrastructure Negotiated trust +1

  Next, they want: “Give me a 30-minute review hold to prepare the board-ready scope, operational impact, dependencies, and phased response plan.” Expect an email.

• HR heard that the fly sent “Phishing wave: A wave of credential-harvesting mail is hitting staff inboxes” up to the board and refused, loudly enough to be heard two floors down. They cooled on the fly a little.

  “The Board has heard the alarm. HR would now appreciate the employee message, including reporting alternatives and what urgent field work should do.”

  HR Pushed back trust -2

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

Diary

• OT / Grid Operations: “A narrowly scoped review plan, with no production OT changes and Grid Operations approval required before any action or external escalation.” Meeting · postponed

  Back on day 7, OT / Grid Operations asked for a meeting with the fly about “A narrowly scoped review plan, with no production OT changes and Grid Operations approval required before any action or external escalation”. It was due today, and got pushed back over a diary clash nobody will explain.

• OT / Grid Operations: “A narrowly scoped impact-review plan today: information sources, named reviewers, no production OT changes, and Grid Operations approval before any action or external escalation.” Meeting · went ahead

  Back on day 8, OT / Grid Operations asked for a meeting with the fly about “A narrowly scoped impact-review plan today: information sources, named reviewers, no production OT changes, and Grid Operations approval before any action or external escalation”, 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