6 ms·

> Also, it can probably be argued that trying to secure your systems against a targeted intrusion from the NSA using technical means is pointless and a waste of

> Also, it can probably be argued that trying to secure your systems against a targeted intrusion from the NSA using technical means is pointless and a waste of money (throwing money at the EFF might be more effective). You're assuming that the NSA is unwilling to do things that are illegal. The (legitimate) fear is that your competitors may have ties to the NSA, who can then target you illegally, which can greatly benefit your competitor and damage your business. Good security has now been made vastly more expensive because the government has to be assumed to have built nearly every high-budget attack vector they could. The cost of defending your business from this is very high, and we're all going to end up paying for it.

fintler 13y ago
> You're assuming that the NSA is unwilling to do things that are illegal. > Good security has now been made vastly more expensive Most (all?) companies won't be able to outspend the NSA when it comes to security. So, my point is that trying to compete with them by spending more is pointless. We won't pay for it, because we can't afford it. Lobbying seems to be the only course of action left which might be effective.
- fragsworth 13y ago
  > won't be able to outspend the NSA You don't need to outspend the NSA to have good security. You just need to spend more than you used to. One example, for instance, is Google now has to encrypt all traffic on its own internal lines.