thewayne: (Default)
[personal profile] thewayne
His premise is that they (California) have security backwards and are arguing that the machines are secure until they're proven not to be, then a patch makes them all better until they are once-again compromised. The full story is that the Californian In Charge of Voting Machine Stuff, after having a hasty report published proving that the machines tested were riddled with bad security, decided that once the uncovered vulnerabilities are patched that the machines can once again be used.

Schneier's point is that security must be built from the ground up, not added on later. Some excellent examples from the NSA.

http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2007/08/securitymatters_0809?currentPage=all

February 2026

S M T W T F S
12 3 45 6 7
8910 11 121314
15161718 19 2021
2223 2425 262728

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Mar. 1st, 2026 11:20 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios