4 ms·

Like computer scientist, they think binary: Either it's secure, or it's not. In reality there's a spectrum where you also have "good enough".

• mbowcutt 7y ago
  "good enough" relies on a threat model. Cryptography researchers work in the abstract - without a threat model you must consider cases where your attacker has unlimited resources. It's good enough for you and me, but research isn't meant to be practical, imo
  • Ar-Curunir 7y ago
    What. The first thing any security paper defines is the assumed threat model. People design all kinds of schemes for different threat models. The point with assuming conservative threat models for key primitives like hash functions is that the threat model can change rapidly even within the same application, and attackers only get stronger. So you err on the side of caution, and don't rely on luck to keep safe.
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• btilly 7y ago
  But in many contexts, "good enough" is more a question of perception than reality. These statements serve to shift the Overton window of perception, and therefore help improve the odds that people are't thinking "good enough" when they are broken.
• rectang 7y ago
  The security strategy with the most practical utility for most software engineers working on most projects is defense in depth: multiple layers, each assumed to be breakable. It's a striking contrast with the stark mathematical language deployed by cryptographers, on whose work we rely. If we differentiate between the two fields of software engineering and cryptography, it's easier to be generous in our appreciation for the different goals and mental models.
• brink 7y ago
  Most people think in yes/no logic. Unfortunately binary is a horrible oversimplification of a very analog reality and results in many of the world's problems that we're in now. Because we tend to think of a binary of yes/no, we often end up flying from one ditch on the side of the road to the other.