True. I think that sending your representative(s) a letter/email about an issue can increase pressure or at leat awareness of it. Much more than social media posts at least. What do you think? π€
I do that sometimes and don't know if it's for nothing. Might depend on the country?
Thanks :) Would've thought you'd quote "English people" but now that I think about it this also makes sense :p
One, why did you quote people?
He wrote code that was so bad, all that was kept from x.com when it was bought was its name. The actual code was taken from another company acquired at the same time.
But what if you don't actually want it, but you are addicted because other people exploit the psychology of humans?
One could argue that it's "their fault", but then everything is ones own fault. Furthermore this wouldn't change the fact IMHO, that we shouldn't prevent people from exploiting or harming other people, yk what I mean?
Anyways, as this doesn't seem to be a loot box or such, I think I agree with you here mostly.
Just use a VPN bro and you're fine /s
Hello, as I said, it's about "security by design", which means to design a system that 'doesn't allow for insecure things' in the first place. Like a microwave oven doesn't operate when the door is open. IT-/cyber-security is a complex field, but 2FA is a good place to start, regarding user facing services. There are lots more things than that of course.
That's exactly right. I was about to say how people usually don't even "not take it seriously" but rather don't even think or know about it. But you already said that yourself haha :D
The lions share IMHO is at 23&me. Offering such a poorly secured service is negligence, in the face of the data's high sensitivity nature.
This shouldn't be "offered" IMHO, this should be mandatory. Yes, people are very ignorant about cyber security (I've studied in this field, trust me, I know). But the answer isn't to put the responsibility on the user! It is to design products and services which are secure by design.
If someone is actually able to crack accounts via brute-forcing common passwords, you did not design a secure service/product.
[Edit: spelling]
I would say it's partially their fault. IMHO 23&me is mainly to blame. They should've enforced (proper) 2FA. Sure, people should've known better, but they didn't; they oftenly don't. But 23&me did know better.
Edit: spelling
Do you know why?