(December 11, 2010 at 9:32 am)tackattack Wrote: I agree that planning for the worstcase is viable and it might be a false analogy. If I had to draw a line in the sand though saying that this is malicious, I'd put it between pulling browser history and traping transmitted data. I was just making the overall point that the majority of people shouldn't have much to hide, so it's really based off of intent not legality. Was AIG, or the banks or other sites on the list intending an attack, I don't think so. Using them as fuel to propigate justifiabe fear of safe sufing is skewing the social view of them to put them in line with malicious hackers. That only benefits political agendas and not the reality of protecting yourself from threats.
As someone who knows just a little bit about computer security, I'd have to say that is a very naive point of view.
"How is it that a lame man does not annoy us while a lame mind does? Because a lame man recognizes that we are walking straight, while a lame mind says that it is we who are limping." - Pascal
