But think this through...if you don't run anything locally then what, exactly, are you protecting on your local system by running things remotely?
Although honestly, for something like photoshop I really don't see a problem. It's a creative tool, and probably isn't producing interesting data for the NSA, et al. The real security concern here is Adobe's, in that they want to protect their software from you, the user. They want to set up an annuity-style revenue stream, and the only way to do that is to protect the binary image of their software. So they did that.
Really, the only objection I would have to this is that it adds a (sometimes rather difficult to meet) requirement that you have a solid internet connection to run what used to be a stand-alone application. More philosophically, I object to the horrible waste this kind of runtime requires, particularly of network bandwidth. Perhaps, though, this is the price of saving the premium proprietary software market.
You are protecting your private information in cloud A from company B. I can trust different groups with different information without giving them all access to the whole set.
While the cartoon is cute, it's wrong. I don't remain logged into services I'm not using. If I'm not doing banking right now, I'm not logged into my bank account. I don't have my browser remember my password, either, so I have to enter it every time I go to their website. I can also locally encrypt data on my drive if I feel it would benefit me. I realize many people are lazy about these things, but I like having the option to not be. (I also don't use many of those services because they are big security risks.)
I know that Randall is focussing on the stored credentials aspect, but the wider picture remains true - local credentials don't matter at all for an average user, because everything that matters is stored and operated remotely.
I should have said "all credentials". The local one may unlock all of the other remote ones. Or you just enter the remote ones directly. Point being, theres a lot to protect. Is a keepassx password a "local credential"?
Although honestly, for something like photoshop I really don't see a problem. It's a creative tool, and probably isn't producing interesting data for the NSA, et al. The real security concern here is Adobe's, in that they want to protect their software from you, the user. They want to set up an annuity-style revenue stream, and the only way to do that is to protect the binary image of their software. So they did that.
Really, the only objection I would have to this is that it adds a (sometimes rather difficult to meet) requirement that you have a solid internet connection to run what used to be a stand-alone application. More philosophically, I object to the horrible waste this kind of runtime requires, particularly of network bandwidth. Perhaps, though, this is the price of saving the premium proprietary software market.