The Evolution of security - Security & Cryptography
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
|
|||
I think that there shouldn't be a permanent security protocol or technology. Or rather, can't be. At least not one implemented on a mass scale.
Perhaps in the future we will have super-duper advanced 'learning' security systems that could lengthen the time period between updating, or creating completely new security systems. According to my knowledge, many contemporary anti-virus softwares already have this type of paradigm implemented. It's, as always, just a matter of refactoring. On the topic of the increasing number of new digital devices to be created in the future becoming interlinked: All I can say is that it's going to be interesting. Many companies are already using existing technologies like Wifi and Bluetooth to link digital devices together. And if not through conventional means, they tend to make that 'extra connector accessory thingy' irrexchangable and exclusive to their closed-source designs. (My parents just bought a new 'Smart' television. When I opened the darn thing I couldn't even figure out where the internal memory unit was located. Heck, everything but the physical ports and the wires looked like Greek to me. Talk about exclusive, irrexchangable closed-source hardware!) As for hack-ability, I think that as everything gets simpler and more automated, the true hacker will be much more of a rare bird. When things 'just work', people don't have to think about how they work. I won't go as far to list the pros and cons of this development, but one can reasonably predict the repercussions. More easy/closed-source exclusive library based programming languages being used(ex. the ".Net" languages) + Moore's Law(hardware getting more awesome) = Less low/er level programming languages needed to be used Less low/er level programming languages needed to be used = Less lower level language programmers Less lower level language programmers = More less-educated programmers More less-educated programmers = Less hackers Less hackers = Less incidents of proprietary technology being teabagged/hacked And that just, well, sucks. :( As for the rest of your post: It's 1:14 in the morning, and I'm too darn tired to type anymore. Sorry. :( Mah eyes! Dey brun!!! It's all your fault.... :sniff: :sniff:
"Willful ignorance is a crime"
|
|||
Messages In This Thread |
The Evolution of security - by venam - 28-08-2012, 11:42 AM
RE: The Evolution of security - by venam - 28-08-2012, 04:08 PM
RE: The Evolution of security - by Dritz - 29-08-2012, 03:20 AM
RE: The Evolution of security - by venam - 29-08-2012, 06:30 AM
RE: The Evolution of security - by D9u - 07-09-2012, 05:50 AM
RE: The Evolution of security - by venam - 07-09-2012, 06:36 AM
RE: The Evolution of security - by CrossFold - 25-09-2012, 02:00 PM
RE: The Evolution of security - by venam - 14-03-2015, 03:15 PM
RE: The Evolution of security - by z3bra - 14-03-2015, 04:13 PM
RE: The Evolution of security - by October - 19-04-2015, 02:49 PM
RE: The Evolution of security - by venam - 28-04-2015, 06:11 AM
RE: The Evolution of security - by venam - 16-03-2016, 04:14 AM
RE: The Evolution of security - by xero - 16-03-2016, 12:55 PM
RE: The Evolution of security - by dtnt - 23-03-2016, 09:38 AM
|