The context:

Log4j Explained: How It Is Exploited and How to Fix It
https://cisomag.eccouncil.org/log4j-explained/

An extremely casual code review of MetaMask’s crypto
https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2022/01/14/an-extremely-casual-code-review-of-metamasks-crypto/

So, the statement in the first article by Dr Coon seems WAY Chicken Little to me. And 
that's despite my history of unhinged rants about the security-through-obscurity approach 
in many (complex) open-source efforts. There's a real risk that we'll see more Big 
Software in the near future. The bureaucrats never miss an opportunity to toss up brick 
walls, make "expertise" seem like a thing, push for certification this and 
letters behind your name that. It's the same tired old argument that open-source has a (n 
infinitely) higher total cost of ownership than proprietary code owned by a legally 
accountable for-profit. [sigh]

But the 2nd article takes a more measured approach, admitting that this stuff 
is hard and what's required is for people (everyone) to dig in and take a look. 
Sure, not all of us are professors of cryptography ... but logistics *is* 
adversarial. Just admit it and get to work.

And don't put all your tokens in one wallet.

--
glen
Theorem 3. There exists a double master function.


.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:
5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to