4 ms·

The strength of a chain is the strength of its weakest link, and the more "apps" are provided as the system the longer and more vulnerable is the chain. When i

by julie1 11y ago

The strength of a chain is the strength of its weakest link, and the more "apps" are provided as the system the longer and more vulnerable is the chain. When it comes to checksums with have the chicken egg problem plus the collision attack of md5. MD5 has been the standard for too long (and is deprecated since 10 years for crypto checksum). And for next generation of softwares to install that don't do modern checksum how can they trust the download of the package required to check for whatever the new format? Plus the new format is less likely to be checked without errors. A off by one character could easily be discarded in checking given the number of packages that are now required to be installed and the human limitation in focus. Human are the limiting factors, and security is modeling the user in a kind of grotesque caricature of a robot that can check thousands of informations perfectly and remember 20 characters passwords for tens of appliances. There is a tyranny of computer engineers regarding what is safe for people having a life not concerned about geeky technology that is a tad annoying. People have the right to be human and to fail is human. The burden put on human to make the system safe in order to avoid costly for the bosses human interactions is way to high. And since computer security always blame failure on human behaviour I begin to positively dislike it.

Razengan 11y ago
> There is a tyranny of computer engineers regarding what is safe for people having a life not concerned about geeky technology that is a tad annoying. You know you can make that complaint about any tool or technology, right? "Gosh why do I have to follow all these rules and observe traffic lights to drive a car?" (something that actually intimidates me, in fact, because I've never driven a car.) "Why do I have to worry about cutting or burning myself or someone else while trying to cook a meal?" "Why are all these procedures and protocols, like schools and banks and taxes, required to function at all in contemporary society?" Until computers advance to the point of being artificially intelligent familiars that can figure out exactly what we want from a simple vocal command and do something even better, we're gonna have to put in a little effort from our end to make them work the way we want them to.
- julie1 11y ago
  You know all engineers do not always blame users? There are fields of engineering where an accident even due to human causes is systematically seen as an engineering problem. And that may be the reason why traveling by plane and train are safer than by car. But US engineers made a great job at convincing legal department that poorly engineered goods where not the causes of accidents.
  - Razengan 11y ago
    > You know all engineers do not always blame users? > There are fields of engineering where an accident even due to human causes is systematically seen as an engineering problem. In those other fields, such as automobiles, an accident by a person may cause death of another. On a computers your careless may not cause someone else to outright die (which tends to cause a lax attitude on the part of users) but they can still cause someone else harm, like inadvertently leaking someone's financial information or causing malware on your device to participate in a DDOS attack on someone. Time and again it's been proven that users are often the weakest link in this field no matter how tight the security is. It's only understandable for the engineers to be annoyed.

by julie1 11y ago

Razengan 11y ago

> There is a tyranny of computer engineers regarding what is safe for people having a life not concerned about geeky technology that is a tad annoying. You know you can make that complaint about any tool or technology, right? "Gosh why do I have to follow all these rules and observe traffic lights to drive a car?" (something that actually intimidates me, in fact, because I've never driven a car.) "Why do I have to worry about cutting or burning myself or someone else while trying to cook a meal?" "Why are all these procedures and protocols, like schools and banks and taxes, required to function at all in contemporary society?" Until computers advance to the point of being artificially intelligent familiars that can figure out exactly what we want from a simple vocal command and do something even better, we're gonna have to put in a little effort from our end to make them work the way we want them to.

julie1 11y ago
You know all engineers do not always blame users? There are fields of engineering where an accident even due to human causes is systematically seen as an engineering problem. And that may be the reason why traveling by plane and train are safer than by car. But US engineers made a great job at convincing legal department that poorly engineered goods where not the causes of accidents.
- Razengan 11y ago
  > You know all engineers do not always blame users? > There are fields of engineering where an accident even due to human causes is systematically seen as an engineering problem. In those other fields, such as automobiles, an accident by a person may cause death of another. On a computers your careless may not cause someone else to outright die (which tends to cause a lax attitude on the part of users) but they can still cause someone else harm, like inadvertently leaking someone's financial information or causing malware on your device to participate in a DDOS attack on someone. Time and again it's been proven that users are often the weakest link in this field no matter how tight the security is. It's only understandable for the engineers to be annoyed.