
Engineering Security (2014) [pdf] - Tomte
https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/book.pdf
======
nickpsecurity
Note that Guttman was also one of the people who gave formal, methods people a
reality check:

[https://web.archive.org/web/20170214231046/http://www.cypher...](https://web.archive.org/web/20170214231046/http://www.cypherpunks.to/~peter/04_verif_techniques.pdf)

His work taught me to watch out for such problems. Plus, keep a mix of formal
and empirical methods on any given project so they cross-check each other.

------
l0b0
Extremely interesting to read how data availability is very often (in the
military, no less) more useful than both confidentiality (because any
eavesdroppers are unlikely to be able to act on the information quickly
enough) and authenticity. I wonder if the latter is because of some
combination of the difficulty of crafting a believable message which will have
the intended effect and the hardware requirements, because the sky isn't full
of nuclear missiles.

------
snazz
The part on the placebo SSL certificate is interesting
([https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/book.pdf#page37](https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/book.pdf#page37)).
Do users really ignore the big red warnings that web browsers give for invalid
certificates? I imagine that it has to do with the fact that someone would
rather be able to do what they want to do instead of heeding a warning they
don’t understand.

~~~
est31
This phenomenon even has a name. Dancing pigs:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_pigs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_pigs)

------
polemic
Note the Author is Dr Peter Gutmann, maintainer of Cryptlib. Highly recommend
you go to one of his talks if you ever get the chance,

------
p1necone
Wow this guy is snarky (probably with good reason though).

~~~
p1necone
On further reading it seems like just the intro section is (imo) unnecessarily
hostile. This is a pretty engrossing read - although I'm skimming through and
just reading all of the amusing anecdotes.

Specific example: Phrases like "Fashion Statement Technology" seemed kind of
unhelpful, better keeping the explanation of why they are bad without the
snarky labels.

~~~
Kalium
For a variety of reasons, snark is omnipresent in security culture. This
writing style is immediately familiar to me as a result.

~~~
p1necone
Just dropping my two cents in as the author was asking for feedback. No idea
if they're reading this thread though.

