From: slash@invalid.invalid   
      
   On 6/8/23 12:49, bad sector wrote:   
   > ...it's not the state snoops who spook me, rather the corporate   
   > scum-field and the id-stealing vermin operating off some  smartphone   
   > in mookmookville.   
      
   You beat them both easily with encryption.   
      
   > That step where one gets involved in the technical discussion is   
   > where I hit the side road partly because I think we should foster   
   > sane stone-age methods of security   
      
   They work. Just keep grunting to people near you instead of using   
   internet, and you are certainly safe. Mafia bosses in Italy evade   
   capture for decades by never going near a telephone. Instead, they hand   
   around easily chewable small pieces of paper. Downside: they need to   
   blindly trust the chewers.   
      
   > instead of just handing everything over to encryption which in the   
   > end relies on trust.   
      
   Nope. It relies on math. But I get it, you don't have a clue, and   
   therefore react as a baboon to whom somebody is trying to teach the   
   advantages of a spoon and a fork. They are useless to him, as encryption   
   is to you.   
      
   > BTW my bank wasn't happy with tls (I presume)   
      
   You presume wrong.   
      
   > so they went to second level security questions which they explained   
   > to me they intend to do much more of in the future. To me that says   
   > they're not all that satisfied with encryption either   
      
   Again, you are clueless. Their mistrust is on you, not on tls. They are   
   pretty sure that you can't keep safe your credentials, and prefer to ask   
   a few more questions, to be sure that it's still you using that   
   password. Rest assured that your bank is not switching from tls to   
   cleartext anytime soon.   
      
   --   
   /   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)