That is not nice. My guess is this guy is really good, got lucky job-wise and is working his ass off. The question is why is this amount of money not enough? That is what he needs to fix and he also needs to be prepared to have a 30-50% salary cut and be able to survive it.

Sadly, it sounds like it. If so, then this person is screwed...

That is risky. From a security POV, SDN is an absolute nightmare. And while that has been clear to actual security experts for a long time, it seems to get harder to ignore for management in the recent past. My point is that we could actually see a regression back to "one cable, one logical network link", because other things are unable to give you a perimeter or any kind of zone-separation.

Of course, SDN could turn out to be secure and even NSA-proof, but who really believes that?

If that where the case, then the only thing he could do is to hope to keep his current high salary as long as possible. A switch is not going to get him what he earns now for a long time, if ever.

If you earn 210K, but cannot afford to be unemployed for more then 3 months, than the problem is on your side because you are spending too much money. I would even say that it is unlikely that you will get this salary again if you switch jobs, as your current salary is way above even most high-qualification jobs.

This is the government. Loss of reality, no common sense, and grand delusions about their own skill and capabilities is standard.

It is government workers. You know, the stupidest of the stupidest combined with top scores in arrogance.

Also provides an useful indicator whether your overclocked rig is running too hot!

This is the only thing that will get us better enterprise IT security. Insurances actually care about not paying, and hence they care about actual risk. They do not care about "compliance" unless it actually decreases their risk.

(Side note: Anything you cannot get insured, like a nuclear reactor, is a very bad idea in the first place.)