Security Flaws Quotes

Anyone, from the most clueless amateur to the best cryptographer, can create an algorithm that he himself can't break.

I don't know the capabilities of our enemies. But I found it quite easy to circumvent security at certain phone companies throughout the United States. So if an inquisitive kid can do it, why can't a cyberterrorist do it?

Almost every OS X server service offers weak or broken authentication mechanisms.

Despite this ever-increasing evidence of WhatsApp being a honeypot for people that still trust Facebook in 2019, it might also be the case that WhatsApp just accidentally implements critical security vulnerabilities across all their apps every few months.

Our current identification system is so disjointed that the World Trade Center terrorists had a total of 63 valid driver's licenses between them.

Every time WhatsApp has to fix a critical vulnerability in their app, a new one seems to appear in its place.

WhatsApp has a consistent history - from zero encryption at its inception to a succession of security issues strangely suitable for surveillance purposes.

The only thing privacy laws accomplish is making the bugs smaller.

It's certainly easier to implement bad security and make it illegal for anyone to notice than it is to implement good security.

If you were going to protect Buckingham Palace, you wouldn't put a tunnel in halfway down the Mall. If you wanted to protected Wembley Stadium, you wouldn't put a tunnel halfway up Wembley Way.

Experts said public companies worry about the loss of customer confidence and the legal liability to shareholders or security vendors when they report flaws.

It turns out that we can build perfectly secure software, and yet people can still get hurt.

It's true, I had hacked into a lot of companies, and took copies of the source code to analyze it for security bugs. If I could locate security bugs, I could become better at hacking into their systems. It was all towards becoming a better hacker.

There's always some potential vulnerabilities in any system.

It doesn't matter how good the card is if the issuance process is flawed.

But it is equally incontrovertible that if our intelligence gathering process is seriously flawed, we had better find out and find out fast if we are to avoid another Sept. 11.

Microsoft made a big deal about Windows NT getting a C2 security rating. They were much less forthcoming with the fact that this rating only applied if the computer was not attached to a network and had no network card, and had its floppy drive epoxied shut, and was running on a Compaq 386. Solaris's C2 rating was just as silly.

A colleague once told me that the world was full of bad security systems designed by people who read Applied Cryptography

In the future, when Microsoft leaves a security-flaw in their code it won't mean that somebody hacks your computer. It will mean that somebody takes control of your servant robot and it stands in your bedroom doorway sharpening a knife and watching you sleep.

For four years, I listened to stories of intelligence failures, and it wasn't due to incompetence of anyone in the system, but that the system is so arcane.

There's no such thing as a foolproof system. That idea fails to take into account the creativity of fools.

The TSA is gambling with the security of civil aviation and expanding its scope irresponsibly. The problem with computerized passenger profiling is that it simply does not work.

Nice' in a bodyguard is about as useful as the ability to regurgitate whole lobsters.

U.S. News Organizations observe the anniversary of September 11 with investigations about the nation's continuing vulnerability to terrorism. First, the New York Daily News reports that two of its reporters carried box cutters, razor kinves, and pepper spray on fourteen commerical flights without getting caught. Then ABC News reports that it smuggled fifteen pounds of uranium into New York City. Then Fox News reports that it flew Osama bin Laden to Washington, D.C., and videotaped him touring the White House.