4 ms·
> What's so wrong with any of this? A very basic principle of security is the principle of least authority. To implement that, you don't use one key for many d
by antonvs 8y ago
> What's so wrong with any of this?
A very basic principle of security is the principle of least authority. To implement that, you don't use one key for many different purposes over a long period of time and give it to anyone who needs it. You use different keys for different purposes, and replace the keys periodically to help ensure that they're only available to a limited group.
Another way to answer your question is "because that's how all these breaches happen."
- charlesdm 8y agoThe short (and sad) answer is that no one really cares about security; they only care about it when something hits the fan. Security isn't a revenue driver, only a cost. It's commonly known that most companies (small or large) vastly prefer investing in things that increase revenue and profit.
- lowercased 8y agoThere was no ability to tell who'd even seen the key. A colleague of mine 'got it', and when it was shown he had it, there was a "WTF? You're not supposed to have that? Where'd you get it?". It was checked in to version control. It was just in a project that only a few people were assigned to, but there was no restriction on who could view those projects.
- figers 8y agoI understand no one having access to the key, but if data is already encrypted using this key and you want to rotate to a new key, how do you decrypt the old data? re-encrypt all old data with the new key?