Wanderer (lair) wrote,

«The mechanisms are remarkable not because their components are especially well made, but rather because their design assumes that they are not. Safe locks are designed not to eliminate imperfections, but to tolerate them, because it is recognized that the manufacturing processes that produce them cannot be perfect. Contrast this with contemporary research in software security, which has the Herculanean goal of completely eliminating any bugs that might have security implications. Perhaps we would do better learning instead to design systems that recognize the inevitability of software errors, tolerating them as safe locks tolerate inevitable mechanical imperfections.»
Matt Blaze, Safecracking for the computer scientist
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded