11 ms·

No, the ultra paranoid would buy two computers... The ultra-ultra paranoid might use their popular and widely read blog - a blog which is almost certainly read

No, the ultra paranoid would buy two computers... The ultra-ultra paranoid might use their popular and widely read blog - a blog which is almost certainly read by more than one or two people at the NSA - to post an enormous boat-load of misdirection that is nevertheless also helpful advice for people who are actually stuck attempting to secure Windows computers. Advice that happens to highlight what a nigh-impossible task that really is. (TEN rules? Good luck.) I can't think of any reason for someone in Schneier's position to publicize his actual security arrangements at this time. Then again, maybe he feels he has a duty, as a security expert, to use and thereby remain familiar with the most popular systems around.

dublinben 13y ago
>Then again, maybe he feels he has a duty, as a security expert, to use and thereby remain familiar with the most popular systems around. I think this is the case for security experts like Schneier and Krebs. Most of the threats they're interested in affect Windows. Most of their readers run Windows. They would be a less useful resource if their first recommendation was always "ditch Windows" even if that's accurate.
- joe_the_user 13y ago
  Maybe he needs to use Windows but whether or not his single air-gap-ed computer runs Windows or not isn't going to determine whether he's going to be running Windows in general. I don't know how maintaining a full off-Internet computer isn't much more extreme than switching OSes. If he is recommended an off-Internet machine, it seems clear he'd want to recommend the hard steps as well as the easy steps. I mean, he says he's running open office so Linux should be able to work great for him.
  - NormaHHopson 13y ago
    my friend's step-sister makes $84/hr on the computer. She has been laid off for nine months but last month her check was $21144 just working on the computer for a few hours. Continue Reading ===================================================http://www.Works23.Com http://www.Works23.Com
larrys 13y ago
"I can't think of any reason for someone in Schneier's position to publicize his actual security arrangements at this time." Schneier is more and more about promoting Schneier. I can't imagine a reason why someone who is so concerned about security would provide details on exactly what they do security wise (that would be accurate at least) because the more information you have about someone's practices the easier it is to defeat those practices. Not to mention the mere fact that he is so much a public figure now makes him much more likely a target which could negate many of the things he is trying to do.
- kevinpet 13y ago
  He's not concerned primarily with his own security. His entire career has been about promoting good security practices.
  - larrys 13y ago
    Has he actually said that he isn't primarily concerned with his own security and he is willing to risk his security for the benefit of others?
    - vdaniuk 13y ago
      Come on, he is doing one of the best jobs in the world educating him about security. No, he probably wont risk his security for the benefit of others but he is a positive force. So please stop holding him to the absurd standards.
      - ateeqs 13y ago
        He is educating himself about security? This may actually be a tautology. :) By the way, how many of you guys have read his books? Having actually read Applied Cryptography, I felt his contribution to this field was very little.
        vdaniuk 13y ago
ZoFreX 13y ago
> I can't think of any reason for someone in Schneier's position to publicize his actual security arrangements at this time. Why not? He's the last person I'd expect to rely on security through obscurity.
- MichaelGG 13y ago
  When the attack vector is literally relying on information disparities (previously unknown exploits), "obscurity" does provide a fair amount of security. If everyone thinks you're running Linux+OpenOffice and spends time writing looking for exploits there, but you're really running BeOS+Pe, that gives you a significant upper hand.
  - SEJeff 13y ago
    One of the few constants in security, "Security through obscurity is no security at all"
    - MichaelGG 13y ago
      I literally gave you one example where that helped. Stuxnet and others are further evidence. Simplified scenario: Your target will open a single file from you. How do you exploit them?
      - antocv 13y ago
        Very good point. Im inclined to believe Scheiers real security arrangemetns are obscured for now.
        SusanLTomlin 13y ago
        my neighbor's step-sister makes $67 hourly on the computer. She has been unemployed for nine months but last month her paycheck was $15744 just working on the computer for a few hours. try this site ====================================================== http://WWW.Works23.Com http://WWW.Works23.Com

dublinben 13y ago

>Then again, maybe he feels he has a duty, as a security expert, to use and thereby remain familiar with the most popular systems around. I think this is the case for security experts like Schneier and Krebs. Most of the threats they're interested in affect Windows. Most of their readers run Windows. They would be a less useful resource if their first recommendation was always "ditch Windows" even if that's accurate.

joe_the_user 13y ago
Maybe he needs to use Windows but whether or not his single air-gap-ed computer runs Windows or not isn't going to determine whether he's going to be running Windows in general. I don't know how maintaining a full off-Internet computer isn't much more extreme than switching OSes. If he is recommended an off-Internet machine, it seems clear he'd want to recommend the hard steps as well as the easy steps. I mean, he says he's running open office so Linux should be able to work great for him.
- NormaHHopson 13y ago
  my friend's step-sister makes $84/hr on the computer. She has been laid off for nine months but last month her check was $21144 just working on the computer for a few hours. Continue Reading ===================================================http://www.Works23.Com http://www.Works23.Com

larrys 13y ago

"I can't think of any reason for someone in Schneier's position to publicize his actual security arrangements at this time." Schneier is more and more about promoting Schneier. I can't imagine a reason why someone who is so concerned about security would provide details on exactly what they do security wise (that would be accurate at least) because the more information you have about someone's practices the easier it is to defeat those practices. Not to mention the mere fact that he is so much a public figure now makes him much more likely a target which could negate many of the things he is trying to do.

kevinpet 13y ago
He's not concerned primarily with his own security. His entire career has been about promoting good security practices.
- larrys 13y ago
  Has he actually said that he isn't primarily concerned with his own security and he is willing to risk his security for the benefit of others?
  - vdaniuk 13y ago
    Come on, he is doing one of the best jobs in the world educating him about security. No, he probably wont risk his security for the benefit of others but he is a positive force. So please stop holding him to the absurd standards.
    - ateeqs 13y ago
      He is educating himself about security? This may actually be a tautology. :) By the way, how many of you guys have read his books? Having actually read Applied Cryptography, I felt his contribution to this field was very little.
      - vdaniuk 13y ago

ZoFreX 13y ago

> I can't think of any reason for someone in Schneier's position to publicize his actual security arrangements at this time. Why not? He's the last person I'd expect to rely on security through obscurity.

MichaelGG 13y ago
When the attack vector is literally relying on information disparities (previously unknown exploits), "obscurity" does provide a fair amount of security. If everyone thinks you're running Linux+OpenOffice and spends time writing looking for exploits there, but you're really running BeOS+Pe, that gives you a significant upper hand.
- SEJeff 13y ago
  One of the few constants in security, "Security through obscurity is no security at all"
  - MichaelGG 13y ago
    I literally gave you one example where that helped. Stuxnet and others are further evidence. Simplified scenario: Your target will open a single file from you. How do you exploit them?
    - antocv 13y ago
      Very good point. Im inclined to believe Scheiers real security arrangemetns are obscured for now.
      - SusanLTomlin 13y ago
        my neighbor's step-sister makes $67 hourly on the computer. She has been unemployed for nine months but last month her paycheck was $15744 just working on the computer for a few hours. try this site ====================================================== http://WWW.Works23.Com http://WWW.Works23.Com