The determination of whether a failure rises to the level of negligent
homicide will require a review of industry standards, company standards and
sometimes straight common-sence.
If the industry standard is airgap re security you are probably okay so
long as you review and address the very concerns and questions you are
raising in a responsible fashion that does not rely solely on expediency,
cost, etc., but looks to real-world scenarios and emergency / backup
procedures, equipment, testing and training.
CMK Consulting Services
Here's a quote from a famous court case (T.J. Hooper) on liability and industry
Indeed in most cases reasonable prudence is in face common prudence; but
strictly it is never its measure; a whole calling may have unduly lagged
in the adoption of new and available devices. It may never set its own
tests, however persuasive be its usages. Courts must in the end say what
is required; there are precautions so imperative that even their universal
disregard will not excuse their omission.
And here's a quote from a legal textbook:
The standard of conduct imposed by the law is an external
one, based upon what society demands generally of its
members, rather than upon the actors personal morality or
individual sense of right and wrong. A failure to conform
to the standard is negligence, therefore, even if it is due
to clumsiness, stupidity, forgetfulness, an excitable
temperament, or even sheer ignorance. An honest blunder,
or a mistaken belief that no damage will result, may absolve
the actor from moral blame, but the harm to others is still
as great, and the actors individual standards must give way
in this area of the law to those of the public. In other
words, society may require of a person not to be awkward
or a fool.
In other words, get real legal advice on the standard of care you should
If only that were more generally true.