[purple-dragon]

At this point, I'm confused, and I'm not sure what point you or the other commenter are looking for me to concede. Zoom is paying some security consultants, pushed out some product updates, and bought Keybase, so it's a story book ending?

[wutbrodo]

Just as your comment was aiming to narrowly point out a logical fallacy in the parent comment, I'm pointing out a flaw in your own: I disagree with your claim that investing in security practices is just theater, and that more concrete efforts in the same direction are irrelevant. The concrete efforts are Bayesian evidence that the newer investments are more than theater.

[purple-dragon]

I didn't claim that. I believe in investing in security. I'm a security professional.

[albedoa]

You said that those things are theater until the day the product updates. We are beyond the day when that happened. So for it to be a fallacy you have to reject the context in which it was presented, which nobody but you is doing.

[purple-dragon]

It's a SaaS world, baby. Product updates (can) happen everyday. I'm not sure what that proved.

[wutbrodo]

Good catch, that was a misphrasing in my comment. I meant to say _Zoom's_ investments in security, not security investments in general.

[ViViDboarder]

I am not looking for you to concede anything. You said nothing has been done to show you that the calculus of their priorities has changed and I listed some things that could possibly show that. It’s up to you if you believe that is significant enough to convince you.

Frankly, I don’t care if it does or not. I was just providing some visible signs of investment.

[purple-dragon]

I didn't see you respond to my comment in this thread unless you post under two different accounts.