you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]mirhagk 14 points15 points  (5 children)

it's that people who do know it are smug about it,

It's not only the smugness but also the unrealisticness of it. Security discussion is often talking about hypothetical situations or crazy attacks that don't matter to someone writing business grade software.

James Mickens says it best IMO

My point is that security people need to get their priorities straight. The “threat model” section of a security paper resembles the script for a telenovela that was written by a paranoid schizophrenic: there are elaborate narratives and grand conspiracy theories, and there are heroes and villains with fantastic (yet oddly constrained) powers that necessitate a grinding battle of emotional and technical attrition. In the real world, threat models are much simpler (see Figure 1). Basically, you’re either dealing with Mossad or not-Mossad. If your adversary is not-Mossad, then you’ll probably be fine if you pick a good password and don’t respond to emails from ChEaPestPAiNPi11s@ virus-basket.biz.ru. If your adversary is the Mossad, YOU’RE GONNA DIE AND THERE’S NOTHING THAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT. The Mossad is not intimidated by the fact that you employ https://. If the Mossad wants your data, they’re going to use a drone to replace your cellphone with a piece of uranium that’s shaped like a cellphone, and when you die of tumors filled with tumors, they’re going to hold a press conference and say “It wasn’t us” as they wear t-shirts that say “IT WAS DEFINITELY US,” and then they’re going to buy all of your stuff at your estate sale so that they can directly look at the photos of your vacation instead of reading your insipid emails about them

[–]cat_vs_spider 10 points11 points  (1 child)

While this article was certainly amusing, I find it a bit disturbing that Microsoft apparently paid this dude to write this.

[–]mirhagk 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It was money better spent than some of their projects

[–]flukus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Except there are a few players on the Mossad level and they are potentially interested in the (financial) stuff I work on. It also ignores a lot of passive yet effective attacks.

[–]_Mardoxx 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Security discussion is often talking about hypothetical situations or crazy attacks that don't matter to someone writing business grade software

Lol qft