Przejdź do głównej zawartości


Two decades ago, my life changed forever: hearing #BruceSchneier explain that "#security" doesn't exist in the abstract. You can only be secure *from some threat*. A fire alarm won't protect you from burglaries. A condom won't protect you from mass shootings. It seems obvious, but how often do we hear about "security" without any mention of *who* is being made secure, and from *which* threat?

1/
A down-the-barrel view of a massive, battleship-gray artillery piece protruding from the brick battlement of a fortress. From the black depths of the barrel shines a red neon 'EBT' sign.


Image:
Bjarne Henning Kvaale (modified)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oscarsborg_28cm_Krupp_cannon_4_-_panoramio.jpg

CC BY-SA 3.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/13/whose-security/#for-me-not-thee

2/

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/3

Ten wpis został zedytowany (1 rok temu)

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/4

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/5

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/6

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/7

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/8

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/9

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/10

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/11

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/12

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/13

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/14

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/15

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/16

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/17

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/18

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/19

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/20

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/21

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/22

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/23

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/24

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/eof

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/eof

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/24

Cory Doctorowudostępnił to.

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/23

Cory Doctorowudostępnił to.

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/15

Cory Doctorowudostępnił to.

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/8

Changing your PIN monthly seems a reasonable precaution, since they can't use the stolen info after that... until they steal it again. Beats the hell out of midnight ATM visits to take out all your cash 😳

This would all be in the meantime till, you know, the speedy government fixes said system. 🙄

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/7

 
They don't want benefits at all.

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Pointing out a typo (but it's a good one)

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Pointing out a typo (but it's a good one)

Anti-virus can't protect you from a post-it-note on a monitor.
Ah. What you're talking about is the "threat model". Which in most organisations I've worked in is the only secret technical document in the company.

Because the threat model document says which threats you *are* addressing ... and therefore, whether explicitly or implicitly, gives away which threats you are *not* addressing (eg "we are not going to spend what it would take to try, and fail, to protect against state level actors").

Your thread (I read some way through, but not all of it) is an example of what can happen when there is an expectation mismatch on the threat model.
My favorites are the companies that insist that they make you more secure by making it difficult or costly for you to see what is occurring with devices or cloud systems. And then putting all bug bounty rewards behind an NDA so it seems to the public like they never had any security issues.
Wait back up. You're saying a condom won't protect you from mass shootings?
Heya Cory @pluralistic In my practice currently and previously I've distilled security down even further to one pithy phrase; "There is no such thing as security.There is only behavior and risk. Use the first to take care of the second." To me this serves a very similar purpose to Bruce's good words.

Cory Doctorowudostępnił to.

Related perhaps to "freedom" - "freedom from" / "freedom to" / "allowed to" / "has capability to"
similar misunderstanding of 'accessible'.

Which, now I think of it, is the opposite of 'secure'.