[clug] Internet banking and browser compatibility

[Sam Couter]

Alex Satrapa <grail at goldweb.com.au> wrote:
> Yes BUT.
>
> a) you'd have to have rights on the computer to import X.509 keys.
> b) you'd have to trust that the Powers That Be and their minions aren't 
> maliciously trying to sniff your X.509 passphrase.
> c) you'd have to trust that the computer is not infected with a dozen  
> different keyboard sniffer malwares.
> d) you'd have to trust ?
>
> See the common theme there?

Yes, I see that your X.509 client certificate is no safer than the
password you'd have to use in its absence. So why is it you're trying to
do any banking at all from this computer? Your client certificate hasn't
made it any harder than it was already.

> Your network NAZIs are really only network neo-liberals. They're nothing 
> compared to what evil is being perpetrated out there in the name of 
> "workplace efficiency" and "policing use of work resources."

They've actually backed off a little over the years. The IT department
can now actually download the .exe and .jar files we need to get our jobs
done.

(Yes I said .exe, yes I have to work on Windows all day, *sob*)

We can even get to Youtube, but not Google Video.
-- 
Sam Couter         |  mailto:sam at couter.id.au
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/linux/attachments/20090218/07e04ac5/attachment.bin