3 ms·

> Who the hell even needs this "feature"? Are we really so afraid of an "evil maid" attack? People who legitimately need it are a minority (some larger corporat

> Who the hell even needs this "feature"? Are we really so afraid of an "evil maid" attack? People who legitimately need it are a minority (some larger corporations and... paranoid people?) and can remove/add their own keys. Calling people paranoid that want security feature X is not productive. European governments are using Trojans to track pretty small crimes already, and some people regularly change planes in charming environments like China. What you say applies to almost every security measure.

jlgreco 14y ago
Listen, I am into security. I've been using FDE for the better part of the past decade, use two-factor authentication along with a passphrase with ssh (and always tunnel my traffic on public wifi), encrypt all of my personal files before I back them up to S3/dropbox/whatever, and have lined my wallet with foil (after microwaving most of my cards). At one point I considered and partially followed through with epoxying the ram into one of my motherboards. For some people, these may be sensible security measures. For most people, including myself, it's just plain old paranoia. So long as it is harmless, there is no problem with it. Protecting the general public from a hypothetical evil maid that wants to swap out their kernel is not harmless if it means inconveniencing consumers^, and is frankly off the deep end. Some people need to worry about that, and the tools needed to protect themselves should be made available to them, but the general public really doesn't have to worry about it. Making people opt-out of it is nuts. ^ Yeah, it's not MSFT's consumers that are being inconvenienced, and I can't imagine OEMs are going to all of a sudden start caring about minority OS users out of nowhere after all of these years... Neither of those facts will make me refrain from futilely complaining on the internet. (as a side note, I don't see how productivity is involved. What does "being productive" mean here?)
- koide 14y ago
  As Harry Dresden said: "... just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face."
- gurkendoktor 14y ago
  > (as a side note, I don't see how productivity is involved. What does "being productive" mean here?) Umm - I guess "convincing" would have been the better word? :) If you blame people for demanding too much security, then it only makes Linux look bad and insecure in comparison to Windows, or at least that was my impression in this thread. I don't think that the threat is inherently less realistic than any of the other things we protect against - the problem is Microsoft's implementation of this particular security measure.

jlgreco 14y ago

Listen, I am into security. I've been using FDE for the better part of the past decade, use two-factor authentication along with a passphrase with ssh (and always tunnel my traffic on public wifi), encrypt all of my personal files before I back them up to S3/dropbox/whatever, and have lined my wallet with foil (after microwaving most of my cards). At one point I considered and partially followed through with epoxying the ram into one of my motherboards. For some people, these may be sensible security measures. For most people, including myself, it's just plain old paranoia. So long as it is harmless, there is no problem with it. Protecting the general public from a hypothetical evil maid that wants to swap out their kernel is not harmless if it means inconveniencing consumers^, and is frankly off the deep end. Some people need to worry about that, and the tools needed to protect themselves should be made available to them, but the general public really doesn't have to worry about it. Making people opt-out of it is nuts. ^ Yeah, it's not MSFT's consumers that are being inconvenienced, and I can't imagine OEMs are going to all of a sudden start caring about minority OS users out of nowhere after all of these years... Neither of those facts will make me refrain from futilely complaining on the internet. (as a side note, I don't see how productivity is involved. What does "being productive" mean here?)

koide 14y ago
As Harry Dresden said: "... just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face."
gurkendoktor 14y ago
> (as a side note, I don't see how productivity is involved. What does "being productive" mean here?) Umm - I guess "convincing" would have been the better word? :) If you blame people for demanding too much security, then it only makes Linux look bad and insecure in comparison to Windows, or at least that was my impression in this thread. I don't think that the threat is inherently less realistic than any of the other things we protect against - the problem is Microsoft's implementation of this particular security measure.