Home » Archives » February 2005 » Security Claims = Joke..?

[ Previous entry: Designing and Building Classes ]
[ Next entry: It's been one week... ]
02/23/2005:

Security Claims = Joke..?




I was thinking of posting something today that I have been wanting to blog about for months already, but since today is the first day of April... I don't want it to be taken as a joke.

Besides, the 'net seems to have pushed this April 1 stuff to another level for the past few years. Too far sometimes, so much so that I have seen so many April Fool's Day 1 jokes even if it's not April 1 1.

Name it and the web has it, even the bidding for used silicon implants on eBay.

One of the April Fool's-01-joke-even-if-it's-not-April-01 joke that I have been reading so much as of late are those claims on security.

Don't get me wrong. Security has never been a joke.

It's the endless claim of having an operating system/browser/whatever that is secure that I find amusing.

I still have to see an operating system that would recreate an important file if I decide to randomly delete a couple of its 'core files'. I have tested that since... well, since 'software security' keeps popping out in most text-infested sites I've seen for the past few years.

Even the deletion of a single text formatted .ini file sometimes crashes the operating system.

I would delete files on a test PC every now and then and see how the operating system reacts to it. So far, the best I have seen is a message showing that a corruption occured, OS needs to be reinstalled along with a logo on it.

Cute.

Sometimes it just reboots endlessly without even telling you what the problem is. Well, unless you call displaying that message and rebooting endlessly a main part of the so-called security feature...

In fact, if you unplug the computer, decide to put that poor thing in the middle of the road and ram even the oldest/crankiest vehicle against it, I don't think your hard disk (and data for that matter) would be secured.

The time you unplug it, most operating system would thumb suck and take refuge in their polka dot protected boxes.

If qsez dad decides to take those CPUs to the rooftop and use it for his daily practice shooting, I don't think any amount of this so-called 'more secured' OS can handle it.

In fact, sans the electrons and protons, an operating system can't even function.

A secure operating system, would be able to do more than what it claims to do, protect you from past and present threats, anticipate future ones, protect your file and your soul, makes your life easier, increases your libido, and transforms into a fully armored incorruptible seven headed, fierce looking, fire breathing medieval knight that protects your damsel-in-distress data when it is unplugged.

(And without thinking about fame, financial profits, and world domination while it's at it.)

Until, someone can invent (and selfishly patent) that medieval knight, you can only dream on about your claims on security.

But, humans and developers should not stop pursuing for it.

And irresponsible marketers/zealots/managementscan always continue claiming that their product is 'more secure'. Besides, it makes good April Fool's 1 jokes.


Disclaimers are for castrated EARTHLINGS.
Powered: GREYMatter | GM-RSS

 

 
 
 
 

 

foxpro.main
foxpro.archives
richardbase.home

articles
downloads
snippets
utilities
knowledgebase.links
website.links

outpost.forum
the.site
the.catalyst
pixelcatalyst.lair

rss.feeds

February 2005
SMTWTFS
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728    
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004





GEEK count:
visitors since the aliens rebooted the counter last 02.23.2006 (was around 33,000++ before the alien intrusion | SINCE: 02.26.2004)