![]() ![]() If we want to use cryptography (and we need to), we also need to store the keys somewhere in the smartphone so we can use them. This is exactly what happens in mobile apps. But what if this is not possible? What if we had to store the key close to the safe? In both cases, the security of the system relies on the assumption that the key is kept in a safe place. The example of the safe proposed in Wired’s article is a good analogy of a cryptographic protocol: the safe would be the protocol itself, the safe’s key (eitherphysical or a passcode) would be the cryptographic key, and the content of the safe would be the data to be protected with encryption. ![]() ![]() Let’s try to find a more specific scenario. The right answer is in the last sentence: “ should never be the only security mechanism.” Security experts have rejected this view as far back as 1851, and advise that obscurity should never be the only security mechanism.” From Wikipedia: “ Security through obscurity (or security by obscurity ) is the reliance in security engineering on design or implementation secrecy as the main method of providing security to a system or component. Which kind of relates to a broader topic known as “security through obscurity”. What is app shielding? OWASP, a global non-profit organisation focused on improving the security of software, describes app shielding as “a set of technologies that typically modify an application’s binary code to make it more resistant to reverse-engineering, tampering, invasive monitoring and intrusion.” In this case, it depends on the execution environment.īut let’s back up for a moment. As with everything in life, the right wording is “it depends”. Well… I have to say that I (somehow) disagree. If you have a secure enough lock, it shouldn’t matter who can see it. Think of shielding code like hiding a safe behind a painting. UV printed image of scarf formerly owned by Margaret Thatcher on plastic table cloth, used wool British army blanket, static electricityĭocument Relief 16 (, inc patent: COMMUNITY SWITCHING), 2019ĭocument Relief 16 (, inc patent: COMMUNITY SWITCHING) (detail), 2019ĭocument Relief 15 (, inc patent: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CUSTOMIZING CONTENT FEEDS), 2019ĭocument Relief 15 (, inc patent: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CUSTOMIZING CONTENT FEEDS) (detail), 2019ĭocument Relief 17 (, inc patent: DYNAMIC GENERATION OF TARGETED MESSAGE USING MACHINE LEARNING), 2019ĭocument Relief 17 (Salesforce.Wired magazine recently published an article with the following statement: Margaret Thatcher scarves, Patagonia 850 Down Sleeping Bag 30 F/-1 C - R parts, Ripstop Nylon, Down sourced from second hand San Francisco garments, carbon fibre, glass fibre, wood Ink Jet Print on Archival Paper, Glue, Custom metal wall mountĭocument Relief 14 (, inc patent: SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF PRESENTING PERSONALIZED PERSONAS IN ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORKS) (detail), 2019 Scarf formerly owned by Margaret Thatcher, Patagonia M’s Down Sweater Vest parts, Down sourced from second hand San Francisco garments, Ripstop Nylon, Salesforce and Quip embroidered logos, wood, glass, photo paper, cardboardĭocument Relief 14 (, inc patent: SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF PRESENTING PERSONALIZED PERSONAS IN ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORKS), 2019 ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |