4 ms·
I agree that for keeping the TSA Joe out of a laptop is is great. The issue comes with educating non technical people, which this article feels like it is aimed
by mr337 11y ago
I agree that for keeping the TSA Joe out of a laptop is is great. The issue comes with educating non technical people, which this article feels like it is aimed at, with a enryption methods that we can't gurantee are sound.
While it may stop petty data theft we have seen how these backdoors trickle down and before you know it your local police department is abusing it left and right. An example of technology that has been package and sold is the Stingray for cell phones. Even though this is more of a nasty feature of cellphones that the Stringray exploits what is stopping a BitLocker or OSX exploit to be commoditized?
- brandon272 11y agoSecurity involves tradeoffs. If you are a non-technical person with typical security needs, the encryption functions that are built into operating systems offer a lot of security with almost no tradeoff other than clicking a button to enable it. Once you start layering on additional requirements for the type of encryption you are using (e.g. has to be open source, has to be audited, needs to offer no evidence of installed OS, etc.), you are creating a myriad of hoops to jump through that a non-technical person is more likely inclined to just not jump through at all. If you are someone with security requirements that need to guarantee that no one will ever be able to access your data, including the police or feds who might have access to secret backdoors, I would hope it's common sense that you should be doing a lot more research on encryption rather than relying on a random security article aimed at non-technical people.