I'm not sure the the Barclays situation should be classified as a "denial of service" - that phrase is usually used to mean a particular type of attack (usually flooding legitimate access points with a large volume of traffic ... a tactic that I'm told has its roots in the US civil rights movement of the 1960s where companies with segregationist policies were targeted with large volumes of low value customer transactions, making normal trade impossible). The information currently in the public domain suggests Barclays suffered from a simple "failure of service".

In terms of available experts - the UK already has the National Cyber Security Service and several standards to work to and be audited against (e.g. ISO 27001).

I suspect the underlying problem is large complicated systems (often with lots of legacy components) and the endurance of human error.

   - Andy.

Hello Andy:

It is not unusual for a phase to be repurposed years later when another significant event(s) happens - in this situation I think "denial of service" is an more than adequate statement.

In one part of your reply you stated that it was a "SIMPLE" FAILURE OF SERVICE while you followed with,- it could be due to BEING a "LARGE  COMPLICATED" SYSTEM-  It is one or the other, BUT NOT BOTH.

Peter Brooks

Palm Bay Florida USA

The failure may be simple, but the system that has failed, complex. But that is perhaps not that important. It highlights that sans computers, modern banks cant. Once upon a time, not so long ago, well within living memory,  the solution would have been to walk into a branch, and do the transaction manually, the bank's paper ledgers being the master copy, and the passbook if it was that sort of account, being the customers.
Not any more. One well placed burst of electrons in the wrong place, and it all stops.

It is a bit unusual, such things are normally accompanied by noises about software  upgrades, as if not testing new software prior to release was an acceptable short-cut.
Maybe it was a hardware fault.

As per the other topic, I agree, the IET lacks the authoritative heft - when something medical happens a BMA spokesman or statement is on the 6 o' clock news, no such equivalent from the IET for matters engineering or technological, in IT or any other field..
Mike.

The failure may be simple, but the system that has failed, complex. But that is perhaps not that important. It highlights that sans computers, modern banks cant. Once upon a time, not so long ago, well within living memory,  the solution would have been to walk into a branch, and do the transaction manually, the bank's paper ledgers being the master copy, and the passbook if it was that sort of account, being the customers.
Not any more. One well placed burst of electrons in the wrong place, and it all stops.

It is a bit unusual, such things are normally accompanied by noises about software  upgrades, as if not testing new software prior to release was an acceptable short-cut.
Maybe it was a hardware fault.

As per the other topic, I agree, the IET lacks the authoritative heft - when something medical happens a BMA spokesman or statement is on the 6 o' clock news, no such equivalent from the IET for matters engineering or technological, in IT or any other field..
Mike.

Well if it is IT, it should really be the BCS...