Bruce Schneier Quotes

Do you realize the FBI filing system from the '50s was much more secure? How could you have stolen that data? It was on notecards. Now someone with a thumb drive, or remotely, can take the equivalent of millions of those notecards.

It is a fiction to imagine that the haphazard paper chits of old are more private than the modern digital alternative. Paper records have always presented a security risk.

Even the best data security systems can't protect private taxpayer information from entrepreneurial foreign businesses than can make huge profits selling U.S. taxpayer information.

Secretary Clinton was warned repeatedly about her duty to secure classified information and that her unsecure server did not meet that standard.

Data is valuable, so let's be mindful of how we're sharing it.

Americans have a right to the security of their personal information, and the entities that hold personal information have a responsibility to protect it.

I think over time more people will become more aware of how vulnerable their data is.

We all have legitimate concerns over the way our personal data is used and stored and it is right that there are protections to stop the theft and manipulation of our private information.

People want to have some assurance that their privacy, their data is going to be protected.

Users are innocent for they can not really make sure if their information is safe or not.

I've got tons of irreplaceable information inside the soul of this computer.

Netflix is very protective with their information .

The fact that this highly classified information of very, very important people in many cases was so poorly protected demonstrates that cyber security is just one more area where the Obama administration has failed.

Cryptography products may be declared illegal, but the information will never be

As our country increasingly relies on electronic information storage and communication, it is imperative that our Government amend our information security laws accordingly.

Privacy is one of the biggest problems in this new electronic age.

Without strong encryption, you will be spied on systematically by lots of people.

I support safeguarding users' personally identifiable information and sensitive data like health or financial records. I also believe the government has a responsibility to punish deceptive and unfair practices that defy reasonable expectations about consumers' privacy.

The leakage of information means you're going to be able to read everybody's e-mail.

I think most organizations have an interest in key recovery, at least with respect to stored data.

Digital data are more fragile than printed material.

Cloud services cut both ways in terms of security: you get off-site backup and disaster recovery, but you entrust your secrets to somebody else's hands. Doing the latter increases your exposure to government surveillance and the potential for deliberate or inadvertent breaches of your confidential files.

Think about it: if you were running a multi-million dollar company, and your database of customer information was stolen, would you want to tell your clients? No. Most companies did not until the laws required them to. It's in the best interest of organisations - when they're attacked and information is stolen - to tell nobody.

The concern is over what will happen as strong encryption becomes commonplace with all digital communications and stored data. Right now the use of encryption isn't all that widespread, but that state of affairs is expected to change rapidly.

The idea that information can be stored in a changing world without an overwhelming depreciation of its value is false. It is scarcely less false than the more plausible claim that after a war we may take our existing weapons, fill their barrels with information.