My counterpoint to that is that if you’re a good security professional, you wouldn’t take such risks because your entire job revolves around mitigating risks.
If you break into a network, or have someone do it for you, it’s very difficult to completely remove all evidence of that having occurred, and because there’s just so many variables, there will always be a non-zero percent chance of it being traced back to you.
Your company can hire an entire security firm of security professionals to look for this evidence. I don’t care who someone is or how good they are at their job, very few people, unless they have narcissistic personality disorder, would trust that their individual skill completely outweighs the combined skill of an entire team of people who do that every day as their occupation.
Furthermore, taking such extreme risks with ones future just screams that they have some mental problem which they should probably be talking to a professional about, because a typical person would consider taking any risk of being imprisoned for years for computer crimes too big of a risk.
With this argumentation, you could argue that a good security professional is not leaving the house, because the risk of something dangerous happening is definitely lower if he stays inside.
Comparing the allegory of my argument to yours, there is a very wide breadth between not going outside because something bad might happen and going outside and setting your cars driver seat on fire to show your wife that someone could potentially set your entire car on fire, leading to your wife calling the police, the police checking your neighbors security camera you didnt even realize existed to notice that you set the drivers seat on fire, and then charging you with mischief, arson, and public endangerment.
My counterpoint to that is that if you’re a good security professional, you wouldn’t take such risks because your entire job revolves around mitigating risks.
If you break into a network, or have someone do it for you, it’s very difficult to completely remove all evidence of that having occurred, and because there’s just so many variables, there will always be a non-zero percent chance of it being traced back to you.
Your company can hire an entire security firm of security professionals to look for this evidence. I don’t care who someone is or how good they are at their job, very few people, unless they have narcissistic personality disorder, would trust that their individual skill completely outweighs the combined skill of an entire team of people who do that every day as their occupation.
Furthermore, taking such extreme risks with ones future just screams that they have some mental problem which they should probably be talking to a professional about, because a typical person would consider taking any risk of being imprisoned for years for computer crimes too big of a risk.
With this argumentation, you could argue that a good security professional is not leaving the house, because the risk of something dangerous happening is definitely lower if he stays inside.
Comparing the allegory of my argument to yours, there is a very wide breadth between not going outside because something bad might happen and going outside and setting your cars driver seat on fire to show your wife that someone could potentially set your entire car on fire, leading to your wife calling the police, the police checking your neighbors security camera you didnt even realize existed to notice that you set the drivers seat on fire, and then charging you with mischief, arson, and public endangerment.