Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> This is exactly why your crypto system should not rely on spontaneously writing many gigabytes on a read operation, without asking.

Again: nobody has said this.

Whether or not the tool does this in bulk, or asynchronously, or whatever else is not particularly important to me. The only concern I have in this conversation is whether it's contradictory to simultaneously assert the value of some data and refuse to encrypt it correctly. Which it is.



> Again: nobody has said this

You said it. You said that's what the cryptosystem should do. It's a bad design.


I don’t see anywhere in my comments that I either state or imply that you have to upgrade everything at once.

From the original comment:

> This is sidestepping the other parts of the comment that don't make sense, like why a single read implies multiple writes




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: