Hacker News Reader

Comment by backlava12 | Hacker News Reader

You would willingly and intentionally chose a less secure password manager and put your company at risk?

Is your management chain aware of this? Which company do you work for? They have the right to know.

This doesn't concern me, but how do you go from "inferior product" to "less secure" and "let me contact your employer"?

There are other secure password managers out there, including open-source alternatives, which can be considered to be inferior due to having fewer features or a worse UI.

On a side note, while I'm sure some people only make decisions based on technical reasons, most don't. Not saying if it's right/wrong or better/worse, but that's how most humans work.

No no no, you are dodging the question. My question could not have been more clear but you are trying to side step it: "You would willingly and intentionally chose a less secure password manager and put your company at risk?"? Yes or no?

What company do you work for that is okay with that? To let your own personal politics compromise their security posture?

Slow down mate, you're not replying to the same user :-)

You asked them the following:

> Would you chose a product inferior to 1password if it better aligned with your politics?

Nowhere in your question you mentioned security, but your conclusion was that they would pick a less secure option and that their employer should be made aware. Maybe not intentionally, but looks like you're trying to win the argument with some word twisting and a 'gotcha'? But maybe that's just my limited English.

Anyway, I'm just pointing out that "inferior" doesn't mean "less secure" and that most people don't only choose things based on technical merits alone (I'd be surprised if you did). With this clarified... I will now leave the thread. Have a nice day!

That wasn't my "conclusion", that was my question to them. There was no "gotcha" here, only asking OP to clarify their position on if they would let politics influence their decision making to the point of undermining their company's security posture.

That "You would willingly and intentionally chose a less secure [...]" did sound like you assuming they would do it, but I guess I misunderstood what you were saying. My bad.

By the way, if you don't consider politics when making these decisions, then I'm not sure if you're doing a very good job either. Your employer may lose customers as result, you may end up without access to the tools or having to move again due to new laws, etc. Politics are always there.

Trump won the popular vote while running a platform of mass deportations. It's just as likely to cut the other way, which goes back to my original point that this type of "woke outrage" is played out and no longer effective.

That will depend a lot on the user/customer base you have. I doubt your business will continue as normal if you support those same ideas publicly and many of your clients are likely to be targeted, for example. The same would happen if you support complete opposite ideas and most of your clients think anyone that doesn't look like them should be deported. If there's a mix, well, you know you're going to piss off some of them.

You always need to be aware of who you're dealing with. This was true 100 years ago, still is today, and I doubt it will ever change.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com