As long as "easy" takes precedence, the internet will never be secure. It is absolutely impossible to have security between 2 parties when a 3rd is involved (CA's). It was done that way because it allows people who don't know anything to have SOME trust. But if there are people involved trust will be broken. 2 party authentication is the only way to solve the problems. If people don't know how to get secure credentials between themselves and another party then maybe they need the internet that still has training wheels and padded helmets.
Yes... the hardware distinction is important. I have a Hopper V2 from Dish with integrated Sling. Its also utterly damn infuriating that I have a device behind my home firewall that I have to log onto a CLOUD service to be able to access. I should be authenticating to my Sling, not to their shit.
Even this is unacceptable. I should be able to have access to my data without it going to another entity first. The data is useful. I should be able to have full access to my data with my data never leaving my sphere of control. Asking another entity for access to what was never theirs to begin with is utterly ridiculous. That's equivalent to buying a house and it keeping track of when you come and go and giving that data exclusively to home builder or realtor, then you having to ask permission to have it.
F-U. Thats why I use linux and encrypt everything myself before it goes to the cloud. I'm not a criminal, but you still ain't going to look at my shit to prove I'm not.
This argument by any provider is absolute bullshit even when you ARE using a subsidized phone. If you leave the contract early you are charged an early termination fee and/or full price for the phone. EIther way the fucking thing is yours and you can do absolutely anything with it that you please.
Companies making statements like this simultaneously humor me and infuriate me. This is the equivalent of buying a house and having it for 3 weeks when the builder shows up and says "I'll let you arrange your furniture the way you want it." He can state it all he wants, but its already done. He is pretending he has authority over something that is no longer his. Fuck this and everything about it. When I pay for it, technology is mine. I'll unlock it and do whatever the fuck I want with it and there isn't a damn thing you can say or do to stop me. (A company) Pretending that they have authority over my shit just makes them look ridiculous. A house builder that I bought a house from may as well make press announcements that he is OK'ing me bath in my shower.
It will be a cold day in hell when I use a cloud based authentication scheme to access my own shit. I'm not going to use a system where I have to ask someone else permission to use my shit. Anyone that does is eventually going to get what they deserve.
I'm not anti-science, but I do believe that too many times scientists draw conclusions based on biases. This is one of those. The bias seems to be that isolation is bad and that people should be around other people. He mentions that it changes brain function but names no specific trending to bad behavior because of those brain changes. Many people like to be alone, I am one of those. There is no better image of hell to me than living in a big city or doing the club thing. I would be perfectly content snowed into a swiss mountain cabin alone for 8 months as long as I had internet.
Thats the point.. Don't give a shit if they can. I'm sorry but I am a bit of a computer elitest. I don't think ISP's should be reponsible for blocking ports or making security decisions on the behalf of their users either, but if they start spewing malware all over the place, then they need to be banned. Proper usage and consequences, there is a secure way to do transactions, people just don't like security. In that case don't bitch about the consequences (not you, just people in general aren't willing to do what is necessary to secure themselves).
When people insist that things are done for them, restrictions get tighter on those of who DO know what we are doing. Companies start catering the lowest common denominator... case in point... Android and Apple walled gardens where you are no longer the admin of your own device. You aren't deemed smart enough to control your own security destiny so they take the functionality away.
Yes, I am a computing elitest. If people don't know what they are doing, then deal with the consequences.
I don't buy the whole... "because people can't use it properly" as an excuse for self signed certs. 3rd parties involved in the process give the illusion of security but in fact guarantee its insecurity. If used PROPERLY self signed certs are the best solution. "Because it is hard" isn't an excuse and is the same issue that makes every company make bad security decisions. They want 100% transparent security, if it can't be transparent they don't want it all. True security will never be transparent.
The whole idea of a 3rd party in a secure communication is ludicrous anyway. Stop the stupid ass warning for self signed certs and let secure communications between the two parties it concerns. Yes it requires that each of the 2 sides know a little bit about what is going on to verify the cert, but there simply is no such thing as a security when a 3rd party is involved whether its the Chinese, the NSA, or the CA themselves.
If only they wouldn't breath our cause would be aided. Get over it gov'ment. Do your work the way your supposed to without invading our privacy and whining over every thing we do that keeps you honest and working for US.. the people. Encryptions protects us from you. We use social media because we like it... etc. etc. etc.
The security for THEM can be more or less secure than current. I don't want their apps shuffling through my shit on my phone. The only way I would use something like this is if I was using Cyanogenmod and over-rode their apps security settings and kept it locked out of everything. I'm not even sure that is trustworthy enough for most crap though. There really needs to be a virtual phone within a phone that can keep each app sandboxed to what it thinks is an entire real phone.
I *** LOVE *** connected devices. Connected to MY network and under MY control. I love to tinker and connect in and do things just to be doing things. But stuff like the NEST thermostat that cannot be controlled directly, but require me to ask PERMISSION from a central authority at Nest to control my device can stuff it. I'd love the technology but if it is in my house, no one else will have access to it.
Better hope the right open source company takes this and runs with it before the Apples and Microsofts and AutoDesk's of the world take it and run with it. Otherwise the walled garden approach will infiltrate real objects and we'll be regulated to death. LED screen says Error: Your custom widget looks too much like ACME widget Model #32456, you must pay for right to print this object. Enter unlock code to enable printing this and similar objects.