|
|
|
|
|
by tessierashpool
749 days ago
|
|
as an old-school reader of the cypherpunks email list from before HTTPS existed, I'm still mad about this part: Outside of actually developing cryptosystems, security tends to be a practical affair where we are happy building systems that improve security posture even if they don't fix everything. there was a time in the 1990s when cryptography geeks were blind to this reality and thought we'd build a very different internet. it sure didn't happen, but it would have been better. we had (and still have today) all the technology required to build genuinely secure systems. we all knew passwords were a shitty alternative. but the people with power were the corrupt, useless "series of tubes!" political class and the VCs, who obviously are always going to favor onboarding and growth over technical validity. it's basically an entire online economy founded on security theater at this point. |
|
True, but if we actually did that, it would make those systems very unpleasant to use. The age-old tradeoff of security vs convenience is still as much a force today as is always has been.
Having technically the tightest possible security is not always the right answer. The right answer is whatever balance people are willing to work with for a particular use case. There's a reason that most people don't secure their houses by removing all windows and installing vault doors.