| 1 |
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:49:29 +0000 |
| 2 |
Stroller <stroller@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Everyone's yakking it up because it makes them look clever. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Either that, or they're 'yakking it up' in hopes of discouraging a |
| 7 |
regular user here from taking an amazing risk with his banking access |
| 8 |
passwords. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> The "Why LastPass is safe" page <https://lastpass.com/safety.php> is |
| 11 |
> indeed bullet-points for idiots, and if that was the only |
| 12 |
> information available on the site then I, too, might be more |
| 13 |
> suspicious. If you look at the "Technology" summary on the site it |
| 14 |
> looks far more reasonable: <https://lastpass.com/technology.php>. |
| 15 |
> Perhaps some other commenters should have read this before posting? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
You've missed the point, which is that users have no way of verifying |
| 18 |
that the LastPass technology actually behaves the way their web site |
| 19 |
claims. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
For example, how would you verify that their software, installed on |
| 22 |
your own machine, doesn't make a hash of the key to your data and send |
| 23 |
it to them? Of course their web site says they don't do that, and if |
| 24 |
that's good enough for you, good luck. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
»Q« |
| 28 |
Kleeneness is next to Gödelness. |
Archives