3 ms·
The author is somewhat known for his over-the-top rants. When you read his writing in the context of a 90's flamewar, you'll find them to be quite moderate and
by klyrs 2y ago
The author is somewhat known for his over-the-top rants. When you read his writing in the context of a 90's flamewar, you'll find them to be quite moderate and reasonable. But it comes from a good place; he's a perfectionist, and he merely expects perfection from the rest of us as well.
- jeanlucas 2y ago> he's a perfectionist, and he merely expects perfection from the rest of us as well. Nicely put, but at the end perfectionism is a flaw.
- himinlomax 2y agoNot when computer security is concerned.
- klyrs 2y agoIn all things, moderation. Security must be evaluated as a collection of tradeoffs -- privacy, usability, efficiency, etc. must be considered. For example, you might suspect that the NSA has a better sieve than the public, and conclude that your RSA key needs to be a full terabyte*. We know that this isn't perfect, of course, but going much beyond that key length will prevent your recipient from decrypting the message in their lifetime. * runtime estimates were not performed to arrive at this large and largely irrelevant number
- saagarjha 2y agoSecurity is a tradeoff. Perfect security is not using a computer.
- jeanlucas 2y agoSecurity is a constant tradeoff, and trading off time for perfectionism is not a good one to take.