geer

So, my counterpoint to Dan Geer (below) pointed that out, gave many examples, and showed it must be the first step.

Dan Geer was right - you fix this with product liability.

As Dan Geer described[1] the problem:...

It's why I counterpointed Geer here [2] saying our software security crisis isn't inevitable: we just need to use hardware and tools that make secure software easier to write.

The problem that Dan Geer pointed out at his NSA talk [1] isn't that they have some surface level vulns, it's that they are mostly all running linux from 5 years ago and rarely get security updates.

I suggested on Schneier's blog we could do what Geer thought was impossible by straight up copying the old NonStop architecture (published in detail) while swapping legacy CPU's for security-enhanced variants like above w/ extra I/O security.

I will refer to Dan Geer when he said[1] (and I suggest this is true for the corporation as well as government): The central dynamic internal to government is, and always has been, that the only way...

Dan Geer was talking about network neutrality, but I believe his solution should apply to privacy as well when he explained[1]: Channeling for Doctor Seuss, if I ran the zoo I'd call up the ISPs and say this: Hello, Uncle Sam here.

> That means gimped Siri As Dan Geer said regarding the inevitable software-industry complains about liability legislation "Yes, please!

Quoting Dan Geer: "Convenience, freedom, security - choose two." Solid cryptography concepts were never easy to implement and use.

So, why was the Dan Geer "against monoculture" thing suppressed so enthusiastically a few years ago?

Or as Daniel Geer et al put it[1] (discussing security, but applicable in general): "The central enemy of reliability is complexity.

I far prefer Dan Geer's proposal (See his black-hat keynote): Companies on the Internet get to choose one of these two business models: A) Common-carrier.

> If I needed to be on-call, I would follow Dan Geer's lead and use a pager.