3 ms·
> Which is worse, the ability to read plaintext on the server silently or forcing a code change to be distributed to every user, however subtle? I would say th
by nwh 13y ago
> Which is worse, the ability to read plaintext on the server silently or forcing a code change to be distributed to every user, however subtle?
I would say that the latter is far more severe. People are going to be a lot more complacent when they believe that the data they are storing can't be accessed by others, or is otherwise immune to attacks. There's also the distinct possibility that the user is going to be storing sensitive information that they wouldn't normally store anywhere but locally.
Don't get me wrong, I love encryption, I just get uneasy around browser implementations. There's some very fragile ones in use at the moment (see mega.co.nz, blockchain.info).
- absherwin 13y agoI'm uncomfortable with arguments that are equivalent to PerceivedBenefit(X)>RealBenefit(X) and RealBenefit(X)>0 but NegativeBenefit(Actions|PerceivedBenefit(X))>RealBenefit(X) so X should be banned. Since PerceivedBenefit(X) and Actions will both vary by individual and are controllable through learning and discipline, I'd rather give individuals the right to choose. Equivalent examples: Seatbelts are bad since people will drive recklessly; calculators are bad since people won't bother learning arithmetic; cars are bad since people will walk less. In each case, the negative does occur. I'd argue that as a whole society is better for all of those.