4 ms·

I believe it. Crafting a weapon that can be used by both you and your enemies would be pyrrhic. The lesson out of this ordeal is probably to be as skeptical as

I believe it. Crafting a weapon that can be used by both you and your enemies would be pyrrhic. The lesson out of this ordeal is probably to be as skeptical as possible of everything you take for granted. How do you know that you're secure? What if your assumptions are wrong? Try to invent ways to break your own assumptions. The best way to protect yourself is to try to defeat yourself. Unfortunately, "ain't nobody got time for that," as they say. But if you find time, it's quite rewarding. And disconcerting. You'll wonder why we're still wrestling with these fundamental problems in 2014, and then you'll start questioning the foundations we've been relying on until now.

flatline 13y ago
> Crafting a weapon that can be used by both you and your enemies would be pyrrhic. In the long run, yes. In the short run, only you know about it and can exploit it from day 0, others are presumably going to take some time to find it, and it may go unnoticed for years or never be found (I understand the error was only present in some versions of OpenSSL and both older and more recent versions were free from it). I'm inclined to think the author made a simple mistake but this does not seem like sufficient incentive against someone introducing such a vulnerability.