3 ms·
The perfect is the enemy of the good. By that I mean that there is no perfect security, at some point, if given long enough, security of any system (computer or
by brigandish 5y ago
The perfect is the enemy of the good. By that I mean that there is no perfect security, at some point, if given long enough, security of any system (computer or otherwise) can/will be broken. The point is to slow it down for long enough that it is of no use.
I have to wonder what kind of information is useful enough to wait forever for? What kind of personal information of mine, for example, will be useful after I'm dead? There may be something.
Even if we look at state actors it doesn't change - if China's government manages to decrypt something the UK has that is useful now, like some advanced technology, will it still be advanced when its encryption is cracked? Slow them down for even 20 years and it'll be too long to wait.
- tinus_hn 5y agoThese are generic platitudes that are not very useful. Obviously you can’t consider whether some random guys data is interesting when you are capturing it in an encrypted state. You just capture everything just in case. And who knows, a way might suddenly appear to decrypt all of it and then you won’t be happy if you didn’t capture it.
- brigandish 5y agoYes, knowing that any data captured cannot be decrypted until after I’m dead is definitely generic as I don’t know anyone who will live long enough for decryption to happen in their lifetime, do you? If not, then you’re wrong about it being a platitude because you’ve given absolutely no reason how that data will be useful, other than ”who knows, a way might suddenly appear to decrypt all of it”. Maybe they’ll also invent a time machine but I’d prefer to stick to the realms of reality rather than sci-fi when assessing risk.