4 ms·
Indeed. When CTOs and CEOs can't help but defer security fixes before anything else, since features matter now and security matters sometime later, how could th
by ploxiln 12y ago
Indeed. When CTOs and CEOs can't help but defer security fixes before anything else, since features matter now and security matters sometime later, how could the "common person" ever choose real security?
They might be scared into paying someone money to make the problem go away, like personal firewall and anti-virus (which as we know makes real applications break more than they block malware from working), or they'll do something therapeutic but useless, like some people used to run defrag every day.
I'm not sure exactly what will happen in the future, and besides ever bigger and more disruptive hacks, I'm sure we'll carry on somehow with sillier and sillier measures, adding layers to the ones that already don't really make sense if you think too hard. People always manage somehow.
- livefreediehard 12y ago> besides ever bigger and more disruptive hacks I hate to say this, but there's your answer. Or at least an answer. If the goal is to reach a massive audience and convince them that their existing Internet usage is insecure, there are ways of doing that. In the same way that Firesheep showed websites that they needed to use HTTPS for all sessions communication beyond just login, a demonstration or series of demonstrations could exist that show hundreds of millions of users and/or the media that they can't rely on websites to adequately protect them, and such demonstrations could explicitly bring user-side encryption to the forefront of the conversation. I seriously don't condone the above and typically view Anonymous-like groups as misguided and self-absorbed. I'm just pointing out that it is possible to reach laypeople. Hopefully there are better ways to do that.