[liberationtech] Wired's response to Soghoian's criticism of their Cryptocat article

[André Rebentisch]

I think Wired is losing me, Greg. The article is far too complex.

We are aware that maturated tools tend to be more secure than new
approaches. That experience and open review matters. That there is no
absolute security.
Or in Prussian army terms: "cleaned", not "clean".

Brave HIV testing won't protect you from other sexually transmitted
deseases. You don't present at HOPE to reach out at naive activist
audiences but hackers and technologists interested in innovative solutions.

We all started as junior knights slaying dragon and bathing in their
blood gave us illusions about our own invulnerability.

I also feel reminded of mountaineer Reinhold Messner
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinhold_Messner) who is an outspoken
critics of the well-organised, technology supported Himalaya mass
expeditions. He believes the technology support adds a false impression
of security while you can't control the mountain. Edgar Whymper famously
wrote that fear of risk is more threatening than the risk itself.

Best,
André


Am 08.08.2012 09:19, schrieb Greg Norcie:
> I am interested in what the list thinks of this recent Wired article:
> http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/08/security-researchers/all/
>
> I have written a few paragraphs, but I'll sit on them until morning and
> see if I am still as unhappy w/ Wired tomorrow morning as I am now
> before posting them publicly.
>