4 ms·

> why bother wish any password beyond abc123? After all, they can "just" torture you for it right? Why bother with HTTPS? I think you're missing the point of t

by cwalv 3y ago

> why bother wish any password beyond abc123? After all, they can "just" torture you for it right? Why bother with HTTPS? I think you're missing the point of the comic. It isn't arguing against basic defense; it's the lengths necessary in "the crypto nerd's imagination" that it's calling out

xoa 3y ago
>it's the lengths necessary in "the crypto nerd's imagination" that it's calling out As well as being a classic example of a strawman, how is the "crypto nerd" wrong? Encryption cipher in these cases is perfectly transparent to the user, there is zero advantage in using something broken vs something secure. We've long, long ago passed the point where hardware symmetric encryption couldn't keep up with the speed of storage. An end user will observe no in-use difference between AES256 and ROT-13. The "crypto nerd" correctly focused on the real threat profiles. How do you supposed the percentage of people facing >beat with lead pipe compares with >someone stole a phone or notebook off a bar table or from a car for drug money, if it's unencrypted maybe someone takes a shot at it, if it's not it instantly gets wiped and sold, or if it has some sort of protection against that it gets chop shop'd and the parts sold ? Which one of these makes sense to focus on? And even in the first case, how do you imagine someone is worse off spilling the password immediately with blubbering apoligies once the lead pipe comes out, vs if they never needed to be asked at all?
- cwalv 3y ago
  > Encryption cipher in these cases is perfectly transparent to the user It's not the specific cipher that it's making fun of, but the "let's build a $x supercomputer to crack it." Honestly, half of the things you say in your edit/replies are really making the same point. But maybe I'm wrong and "everything" about the comic is actually stupid, wrong, etc. Even so, I'm not going to get too upset about it

by cwalv 3y ago

xoa 3y ago

>it's the lengths necessary in "the crypto nerd's imagination" that it's calling out As well as being a classic example of a strawman, how is the "crypto nerd" wrong? Encryption cipher in these cases is perfectly transparent to the user, there is zero advantage in using something broken vs something secure. We've long, long ago passed the point where hardware symmetric encryption couldn't keep up with the speed of storage. An end user will observe no in-use difference between AES256 and ROT-13. The "crypto nerd" correctly focused on the real threat profiles. How do you supposed the percentage of people facing >beat with lead pipe compares with >someone stole a phone or notebook off a bar table or from a car for drug money, if it's unencrypted maybe someone takes a shot at it, if it's not it instantly gets wiped and sold, or if it has some sort of protection against that it gets chop shop'd and the parts sold ? Which one of these makes sense to focus on? And even in the first case, how do you imagine someone is worse off spilling the password immediately with blubbering apoligies once the lead pipe comes out, vs if they never needed to be asked at all?

cwalv 3y ago
> Encryption cipher in these cases is perfectly transparent to the user It's not the specific cipher that it's making fun of, but the "let's build a $x supercomputer to crack it." Honestly, half of the things you say in your edit/replies are really making the same point. But maybe I'm wrong and "everything" about the comic is actually stupid, wrong, etc. Even so, I'm not going to get too upset about it