(Total Views: 502)
Posted On: 04/24/2020 5:02:23 AM
Post# of 32698
Securing an application or product is not cheap! As you say, it doesn't come for free either. End to end encryption requires computing resources, as does plugging any security holes in Zoom that you can at the input and outputs. Some security holes just can't be plugged unless you were able to get to the Zoom code itself, which obviously is proprietary. Not to mention when a customer buys a software application, they expect it to be secure. I have never heard of an end-user application requiring the user to supply the security! When you pay money for an end-user product, you expect it to be secure, rather than having to pay MORE money and invest resources and the time to make it secure!
That is the equivalent of buying a car, but oh, it's up to you to provide the locks and keys to the door and to start the car. These days with the electronic locks, that technology is more sophisticated, and would take real money to implement. That's a pretty good analogy, but it even works for old fashioned keys and locks, although those are obviously easier to implement. However these days cars have door handles where you touch them to open the car if you have the key in your pocket, and being able to lock/unlock the car from a distance, and in some cases being able to start the car remotely.
For Zoom to:
1. rely upon the customer to provide security
2. not even disclose that to customers
is a cardinal sin. It is unethical, and has exposed large corporate customers, school systems, etc. to security holes. Companies use Zoom to videoconference and discuss proprietary information, development on new products, etc. etc. Corporate spies must be having a field day with the security lapses in zoom!
I have read articles about school systems fleeing zoom, after having remote learning classes hacked and horrific images put on the videoconference to young children. Of course this gave rise to the term "Zoombombing" which I guess may be officially entered into next years Webster dictionary. Not something to be proud of having a new term coined that has very negative connotations.
Zoom stock may be zooming right now, but I'm afraid their reputation is irreparably damaged and more and more people are going to leave them. They are going to take the next 6 months stopping all new development and focus on securing the product? Too little, too late, and why would I want to use the product in the next 6 months? During that timeframe I'll find a competing product I like. Then, 6 months later, if I like that product, why on earth would I switch back to Zoom which betrayed my trust not even telling me I was responsible for securing their product?
That is the equivalent of buying a car, but oh, it's up to you to provide the locks and keys to the door and to start the car. These days with the electronic locks, that technology is more sophisticated, and would take real money to implement. That's a pretty good analogy, but it even works for old fashioned keys and locks, although those are obviously easier to implement. However these days cars have door handles where you touch them to open the car if you have the key in your pocket, and being able to lock/unlock the car from a distance, and in some cases being able to start the car remotely.
For Zoom to:
1. rely upon the customer to provide security
2. not even disclose that to customers
is a cardinal sin. It is unethical, and has exposed large corporate customers, school systems, etc. to security holes. Companies use Zoom to videoconference and discuss proprietary information, development on new products, etc. etc. Corporate spies must be having a field day with the security lapses in zoom!
I have read articles about school systems fleeing zoom, after having remote learning classes hacked and horrific images put on the videoconference to young children. Of course this gave rise to the term "Zoombombing" which I guess may be officially entered into next years Webster dictionary. Not something to be proud of having a new term coined that has very negative connotations.
Zoom stock may be zooming right now, but I'm afraid their reputation is irreparably damaged and more and more people are going to leave them. They are going to take the next 6 months stopping all new development and focus on securing the product? Too little, too late, and why would I want to use the product in the next 6 months? During that timeframe I'll find a competing product I like. Then, 6 months later, if I like that product, why on earth would I switch back to Zoom which betrayed my trust not even telling me I was responsible for securing their product?
(16)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
