Comment by devopsproject | Hacker News Reader

Comment by devopsproject | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Transmitting encryption keys is not a feature any sane person would want. It is convenient. But the fact that it does this in the background is ridiculous.

And your cost comparison is equally absurd. It costs more money to store and manage our keys than it would to just leave them alone.

> Microsoft is not trying to mess with your system via that method

They use other methods to interact with your pc without your permission

1. http://www.informationweek.com/microsoft-updates-windows-wit...

2. http://slated.org/windows_by_stealth_the_updates_you_dont_wa...

Your core dumps are being captured. And then sent to a third party: https://betanews.com/2016/11/24/microsoft-shares-windows-10-...

Default settings let Microsoft capture everything you type and your browsing history: https://web.archive.org/web/20151001035410/https://jonathan....

And don't forget about the NSA key buried in windows: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article40836.html

I am a windows user. I'm just not sure how anyone could claim that an OS that updates without your permission, sends and stores your encryption keys, captures browser history and all keystrokes, etc is not considered malware.

Quoting you, "I'm just not sure how anyone could claim that an OS that updates without your permission, sends and stores your encryption keys, captures browser history and all keystrokes, etc is not considered malware."

I'm making that claim and I don't think you have a clue on how security works.

1. Transmitting encryption keys is something many people want as it removes the overhead of them having to manage them on their own. Businesses use this too (via the cloud) in many cases. As for doing it in the background - how else should it do it? Have a big flashy screen that will confuse the average user? This feature allows Microsoft to gradually raise the bar on its OS security and prevent data recovery from physically stolen devices; while still allowing the user to recover their data if they lock themselves out.

2. The cost comparison is valid. Disk is cheap, and key management should be (this I don't know) automated. Microsoft stores tons of data already (all major software vendors do).

3. Windows Updates should trend towards automation frankly for the consumer versions of the product. Those versions don't have sufficient security features to not get updated.

4. No PII is sent with the core dumps; it's debugging information and helps make the product more secure - that's kind of something you want right?

5. The NSA key is a known falsehood. I'm not even going to bother to address it.

I'm honestly not sure if you're a troll or a rabid conspiracy theorist at this point.

> Transmitting encryption keys is something many people want

This proves you know absolutely nothing about security. lol. The reason they call them "private" is because you are supposed to keep it a secret. Key management services exist to promote ease of use. And those often include extra layers of protection (eg hsm)

> I'm honestly not sure if you're a troll or a rabid conspiracy theorist

Your logical fallicay is "ad hominem". How is this helping your argument?

I use windows. If I was rabid i'd be on SElinux all day. I'm just not ignorant to volumes of data our computers are leaking.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com