4 ms·
Ok. Well I gave a couple of examples of what I'm getting at. So how can a convenient way to establish a digital identity also be secure? To run with the see-sa
by flir 1y ago
Ok. Well I gave a couple of examples of what I'm getting at.
So how can a convenient way to establish a digital identity also be secure? To run with the see-saw analogy, what element would of that process would make the process both more convenient and more secure? (make the see-saw rise at both ends).
- surgical_fire 1y agoMy point of them being orthogonal is that both ends of the seesaw can come down together. The logical conclusion is that they can come up together. In other words, it is not a seesaw. Counter example - the usage of a password manager so that you have strong passwords on every service. It is extremely convenient (I don't have to remember passwords anymore, just the one for the password manager). It is also inherently more secure, as I can now use a different strong password for every service.
- flir 1y agoI think that's a really good counterexample that proves that my model isn't universally true.
- flir 1y agoRandom follow-up thought: If the password manager is cloud backed, you're at risk of a LastPass-style data breach. If it's local only, you're at risk of someone confiscating your device also removing your access to all your online tools. (I think I'm edging towards "measuring secureness is really hard", which isn't where either of us came in).
- surgical_fire 1y agoGood points, that also point to security being orthogonal to convenience. Rather than being opposite to one another, they are in tension. Alternatively, you could have a local password manager that syncs the encrypted passwords database to a private remote server, for example.
- flir 1y agoI really like "in tension". It implies, to me, an inverse relationship but an elastic one. Not a simple 1:1.