Computer security - 2014-01-09-09-09

So apparently there is this password protection program.

A password represents a part of the user…. It’s their thoughts on what that means to them.  Some people think in this way, and some in that, and some are here to stay, and some go away, and some are taken away…

We need the freedom to use whatever passwords seem right to us.  There is a clause in the “Terms of Use” that states that we are responsible for what happens on our account.  And if our account gets compromised, then we are responsible for it, and we choose a different password, better in our eyes than the last.

Of course, we have to consider the fact that that clause is in itself a little erroneous, because the security of an account is itself open to question, and not dependent on a password alone.  There are any number of hackers that can hack right past the password, not even need the password, except as an auxiliary means of security.

So it depends on the offering company to set the bar on how important the password is.  Some have features like “You have not logged into this system from this location before…  Is it really you…?”  So that becomes an additional means of security.

To blame the entire security of the account on a password is not acceptable, no matter how apparently secure the password process becomes.  Introducing a physical token or biometrics to complicate the password process will only lead to frustration on the part of the user, and they may no longer even use the system.  Plus the fact that placing the onus on a biometric system causes mutilation of the body if someone is really keen on getting that password.

Make it as easy as possible. 

So the moral of the rambling is that when someone asks you for something, give them something.  Then when they realize that that is not what they want, they will realize that you are not the source, and they will turn away and continue their search another way.

If someone wants to hack a computer, I suppose the best option now would be to let them hack it.  Then they will see whatever is the reality, and then they can decide for themselves … whatever they decide.

What if they leave a piece of something on it…?  Well, if someone strikes you on one cheek, turn the other….  So the thing is, they just want to leave a piece of themselves there… Might be acceptable to some, might not be to others… So the hacked computer personnel will know something about that hacker … without going to the trouble of trying to find out anything about him.

It is absolutely the easiest security system in the world.  Let people in, and let them drop their stuff.  Just file that away, for a rainy day… Never know when it’s going to rain, and when it does, it just might pour…. And you’ll need all the friends and contacts you have, and you’ll have a ready list of those who were interested enough in trying to get through to you….

After all, no point in trying to work with those who have nothing in common with you.  It’s frustrating to them, frustrating to you, and in the end both lose at a fruitless venture… But at least the next time they will know to avoid each other….  Till it all happens again…

Okay, this seems to assume that we can’t do anything, and the hacker is the only one that matters.  Well, apparently we have reactions too… So if we don’t like the hack, we too are free to do as we choose….  Block them, or ….  Whatever we choose…  After all, we have to optimize ourselves any way we think best.  And if we think that the hacker compromises us, then we are free to do whatever means we think necessary to get ourselves back to optimum condition again… So there!

No comments:

Post a Comment