20 ms·
> [..] but I take issue with the "break SSL = break JS crypto" argument. Respectfully, I'd suggest that this is not the argument. The argument is that breakin
by bloblaw 13y ago
> [..] but I take issue with the "break SSL = break JS crypto" argument.
Respectfully, I'd suggest that this is not the argument.
The argument is that breaking SSL = accessing the data the crypto protects. Crypto is a means to an end...which is protecting sensitive information. moxie decidedly did not "break" the crypto, because he didn't have to.
It's a bit like a bank vault with the world's strongest door, but when it was installed they put in a 4' x 5' window next to the door. The vault door (aka the crypto) is fine and unbroken, but I still can get access to your money because your security system has a weak point.
- lawnchair_larry 13y agoBut it's not a given that you can "break" SSL. The problem that moxie is highlighting actually has no solution (even HSTS isn't a solution) and relies on users to not notice that they have been downgraded to HTTP. Unless moxie also wants to say, with a straight face, that twitter and gmail would be better off disabling HTTPS, I don't think that claim is fair.