As usual, the discussion about whether something is secure enough or not should start from describing various attack vectors (which will be different for differ

As usual, the discussion about whether something is secure enough or not should start from describing various attack vectors (which will be different for different class of users). AFAIK, the airborn product tries to eliminate an attack on its own servers / data stored on servers and in transit. While it is a good thing but by itself it doesn't necessarily make all the users of the product secure. In particular, they ignore attacks on the client itself, injection on the network, and several other "offline" attack vectors (e.g. taking pictures of user's screen). I understand the desire to make marketing simple for end users, but I really don't think that it helps people make rational decisions about security.