But cost is one - pretty good - way to figure out which branch of that tree to take. You can decide to (arbitrarily?) weight the decision towards the cost of securing the system.
I don't see how it is that security isn't totally analogous to a lighthouse, which is the classic example used to explain public goods. Yet we're expecting Yahoo to underwrite security on its own?
And how is it that we simply let the attackers off the hook? Using naval piracy as a metaphor, the response was rather violent suppression by (primarily the British) Naval forces.
The seas were commons, and pirates were hung from yardarms as a public service.
I could cynically project that "security" is being used somewhat as a make-work program for engineering staff. Te concern is that language systems of inappropriate weight may be used simply because they're "secure". Granted, the hardware ecosystem certainly makes this less than problematic.
And I am sure these metaphors break down at some point, but they work for me, for now.
I don't see how it is that security isn't totally analogous to a lighthouse, which is the classic example used to explain public goods. Yet we're expecting Yahoo to underwrite security on its own?
And how is it that we simply let the attackers off the hook? Using naval piracy as a metaphor, the response was rather violent suppression by (primarily the British) Naval forces.
The seas were commons, and pirates were hung from yardarms as a public service.
I could cynically project that "security" is being used somewhat as a make-work program for engineering staff. Te concern is that language systems of inappropriate weight may be used simply because they're "secure". Granted, the hardware ecosystem certainly makes this less than problematic.
And I am sure these metaphors break down at some point, but they work for me, for now.