Kids: Fuck you, “security expert”. Thanks for making our situation even worse. Those government institute will surely force that shit upon us and we have no reliable ways to fight back. The only real way to mitigate the situation was letting those morons to roll out noneffective way to punish us for nothing. But here you are, making us suffer just for a chance of looking clever on the Internet.
So, fighting for some basic freedom for kids is “pessimistic” and looking for flaws in their cage letting at least some of them to get free is… good? Correct? What a nice guy, “security expert”. Helping to keep those pesky kids in line. Correct?
So your argument is that since you are opposed to the app’s very existence it’s immoral to test it for security flaws.
I’d like to argue against that with the principle of defense in depth. I’m also not a friend of OS-level age verification and would like it to be dropped. But if it is implemented I want it to be implemented in a way that isn’t wildly insecure. I can simultaneously argue against the principle as a whole and insist that any implementation of it be secure. If it does come I at least want the damage from a botched implementation to be mitigated.
To use your cage analogy, I can both complain about the principle of caging people and about the fact that the cage is badly made and poses an injury risk to the people inside it. Neither is acceptable.
you are missing the point: this measure is a steaming pile of dogshit. but it’ll be forced on us anyway - the least we can do is make sure it’s at least secure because even a hardliner can’t defend this security issue
Kids: Fuck you, “security expert”. Thanks for making our situation even worse. Those government institute will surely force that shit upon us and we have no reliable ways to fight back. The only real way to mitigate the situation was letting those morons to roll out noneffective way to punish us for nothing. But here you are, making us suffer just for a chance of looking clever on the Internet.
lol are you implying security experts should not probe this and we just let it happen?
We already let it happen. And all we must do is “unlet” it from happen. Not investigate the quality of shit.
that is a very pessimistic outlook.
there covid app for example was also something that could be misused in terrible ways and they managed to even get it approved by the ccc.
defeatism just makes things worse.
So, fighting for some basic freedom for kids is “pessimistic” and looking for flaws in their cage letting at least some of them to get free is… good? Correct? What a nice guy, “security expert”. Helping to keep those pesky kids in line. Correct?
So your argument is that since you are opposed to the app’s very existence it’s immoral to test it for security flaws.
I’d like to argue against that with the principle of defense in depth. I’m also not a friend of OS-level age verification and would like it to be dropped. But if it is implemented I want it to be implemented in a way that isn’t wildly insecure. I can simultaneously argue against the principle as a whole and insist that any implementation of it be secure. If it does come I at least want the damage from a botched implementation to be mitigated.
To use your cage analogy, I can both complain about the principle of caging people and about the fact that the cage is badly made and poses an injury risk to the people inside it. Neither is acceptable.
you are missing the point: this measure is a steaming pile of dogshit. but it’ll be forced on us anyway - the least we can do is make sure it’s at least secure because even a hardliner can’t defend this security issue