|
|
|
|
|
by singlow
4627 days ago
|
|
I think what he is saying is that many individuals and organizations will not learn the fundamentals behind why X is broken, they only learn "X is broken use Y instead." They instead should learn that Y is also potentially broken in a given circumstance - and maybe that doesn't apply to my current situation but I need a review process to check that it still doesn't apply to me at a given time in the future. For someone designing a cryptography application, this understanding should be very deep. I don't think it needs to be as deep for someone who is configuring their Apache server and just needs to know what ciphers to enable and which ones to prefer. In this case it is best to follow an industry best practice based on the type of data being sent over the wire and the compatibility/performance required by the clients/users. Then schedule an annual or quarterly review of those choices to make sure they don't go out of date and keep an eye on security bulletins in case one of them is severely broken. |
|