News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Hierarchy of Hazard Controls by AlotOfReading on Saturday March 08, 2025 @05:12PM (#43304025)
I haven't encountered the hierarchy in years, but I've always felt it was a bit of a weird idea.

The first and third tiers (elimination and controls) are the same thing: separating the hazard from potential injury conditions. This can be spatial separation, temporal separation, or a dozen other kinds. A real-world example is how xray techs have to physically leave the exposure area and stand behind a lead panel to turn on the beam. The hazard (radiation exposure) remains, but the system is safe because the tech can't be exposed to it. We use this all the time in software. Process boundaries are a form of spatial separation, mutexes enforce temporal separation. test/prod systems, principle of least privilege, separation of concerns, etc.

Re:The Hierarchy of Hazard Controls by kvmet on Saturday March 08, 2025 @06:34PM (#43304603)
Elimination is not the same as separating someone from the hazard. Edit: elimination is (re)moving the hazard and a control is adding a barrier or moving the person

Elimination is completely getting rid of the hazard. (In the case of x-ray it would be just not doing an x-ray at all)

Re:The Hierarchy of Hazard Controls by eternityforest on Sunday March 09, 2025 @04:33PM (#43313458)
Controls can fail. Tanks of toxic waste can leak. Toxic waste that doesn't exist is much safer, assuming its not needed to prevent danger elsewhere.
Re:The Hierarchy of Hazard Controls by AlotOfReading on Sunday March 09, 2025 @06:28PM (#43314560)
They end up looking very similar in your FMEA or fault tree analysis.