3 ms·
> engineers now must fully understand the consequences of anything they log I don't think this is quite the dichotomy you make it out to be. So we can create
by platz 7y ago
> engineers now must fully understand the consequences of anything they log
I don't think this is quite the dichotomy you make it out to be.
So we can create optimizing compilers, but we can't figure out what to log?
This seems like a problem of never having motivation to solve the problem before.
"We can't do that, it's too hard" is often a mea culpa I'm industry when they oppose regulation. Then they will come up with a solution from having actually spent some effort to actually think of potential solutions.
- Nasrudith 7y agoOh we can figure out what to log - and figure out how it would suck donkey balls. Just like the other "too hard" areas like the magic golden key backdoor. It can trivially backfire to make things less secure if it is poorly defined which is generally a given. The GDPR made exfiltration easy as an account compromise - one could argue it is an acceptable trade off for transparency but the regulators must bear full responsibility for their constraints. "We can't log sensitive customer data slowing down debugging and worsening data integrity" is one thing but now imagine "can't log customer IDs in a read only way as sensitive information" oops there goes a lot of useful auditing information as it is excluded or forced to be writeable.
- platz 7y agoIt's to hard to do anything so lets do nothing.