Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I hope they recover from this, but they need to understand security to produce a security product. it's because the market doesn't actually pay for a secure product, but the appearance of one. The end-user buying cannot really discern whether the company's product is actually secure. There's no third-party standard auditing (let's say, a gov't organization). Banks are run securely, not because I personally audit th…
Eh banks run securely because it’s very difficult to steal money. Hard currency theft requires a physical attack and “digital currency” is just essentially a spreadsheet that requires a settlement mechanism such as correspondent banking to work. Banks transfers are nothing more than messages going between different branches and banks there is nothing being transferred other than orders. The attack surface on modern b…
i think you got the cause and effect wrong - banks are run securely because it's made to be very difficult to steal money. And stolen money gets tracked (if you did steal a large amount) by anti-money laundering laws, which makes it hard to spend it.
Why is banks' attack surface small? Why is all these other "systems" in place to make stealing money difficult?
Why isn't the same happening with stolen credentials, or data?