[ciphershed] Re: Protectorion - low quality encryption for Windows
- From: Pid Zero <p1dz3r0@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "ciphershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ciphershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 07:01:08 +0100
Is it not worth Jos or whoever manages that twitter account using it to
publicly rebuke the security of Protectorion?
Guilt by association & all that.
On Friday, June 27, 2014, Bill Cox <waywardgeek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:09 PM, Niklas Lemcke - 林樂寬 <
> compul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','compul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx');>> wrote:
>
>> > Very good to know about and be aware of, but we need to keep in mind
>> that, from the user's perspective, they usually can't tell the difference
>> between what's actually secure, and what's crap. All they know is what's
>> the easiest to use and what they trust the most. There's no easy solution
>> to this, but it's worth keeping in mind that relatively insecure solutions
>> like that could win the hearts of users if we don't consider the end-users
>> carefully enough.
>> >
>> > Alain
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Exactly, the average user can't tell. Since now already that kind of
>> people start trying to pull people from TCNext's popularity, we should
>> really quickly get ready for Jo to spread the news about CipherShed.
>>
>> --
>> Niklas
>>
>
> +1
>
> Bill
>
--
--
At the time of writing, no warrants have ever been served to me, nor am I
under any personal legal compulsion concerning the
CipherShed project. I do not know of any searches or seizures of my
assets.
Other related posts:
