4 ms·

I did read your whole post. Can you elaborate?

• diffeomorphism 7y ago
  You only replied to the first part I wrote. The second part says that your stance is contradicting itself. The following is meaningless: > I don't care that it is insecure, as long as it is secure. But the following would be fine: > I don't care what they change it to, as the new solution is secure. The point being that "stored in plain text, as long as it is secure" is impossible just like "water, as long as it is dry".
  • matz1 7y ago
    > I don't care that it is insecure, as long as it is secure Ok let me clarify, I don't care if they use plain text pwd as long as it secure. >The point being that "stored in plain text, as long as it is secure" is impossible just like "water, as long as it is dry No, it is possible that they do some thing else to secure the money, not just password. Using analogy can eventually break downs but its fine I'll go along. Let say I need my car to be cleaned, I have only two requirements : - the car is clean - the car never get wet So someone did that satisfied all my requirements. The car is clean and never get wet. Later on they told me that they use water all along. Will I get mad ? No, why should I. They fulfill my requirements as I expected. How they do that is implementation details, which is not my concern, its not part of my requirements. Unless "not use water" is specifically part of my requirements, I wouldn't be mad at them.