(December 12, 2010 at 10:47 pm)Jaysyn Wrote:(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.
Yeah...sorry Tacky but naivety gets your private accounts and identity stolen. So much is done 'online' it is not a place to "turn the other cheek" nor be conciliatory towards "one's fellow man". AIG should notify those accessing the site that the users browsers will be accessed ...failure to do so is the beginnings of criminal activity.
"The Universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements: energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest." G'Kar-B5
