[Cryptography] How to De-Bollocks Cryptography?

[Kent Borg]

On 8/11/24 13:12, Ray Dillinger wrote:
> At the risk of excessive snark, I'll point out that the simplest way 
> to secure a building is to omit complications like interior spaces 
> that an attacker could gain access to.

Bravo, you have come up with an extreme example that illustrates how 
extending something to its logical conclusion is frequently silly.

Your example is very simple to document. Draw a block diagram and…I 
suppose you have a single block, inked in 100%, fits on a tiny piece of 
paper.


In contrast, look at how most computer systems are built these days ("I 
have an idea for a start up! Listen…"), and try to document one. Just a 
slightly detailed block diagram is going to be big enough to fill 
multiple walls. Even for something "simple", because the cloud and 
containers and repurposing a static hypertext system as a general 
purpose UI and...

Almost as if someone were trying to come up with an example at the 
*other* extreme, inexplicably taking Rube Goldberg as wise inspiration 
and not as silly entertainment.


-kb