Similarly here, I'd argue that a verified implementation with correctness proofs, mechanical translation, and easily auditable theorems seems close to good enough? A lot rides on the Claude-built translator, I suppose, but the trusted code for that project seems to be tiny in comparison to what it would have been 2 years ago!
"Good enough" in colloquial speak usually means the minimum required for some particular requirement.
For security, there is usually no exact threshold that differs between insecure and secure. It's a spectrum that involves costs and tradeoffs, which are subjective value judgements.
A SaaS startup in pre-seed mode with no customers will have VASTLY different value judgements than a bank that handles $trillions in assets. Hence they will make very different security choices and "good enough" will mean very different things in their different sectors.
You need to find a new way to do business with the assumption that you’re 100% eventually going to get pwned
So just assume that going forward and you’ll start to rethink your architecture
This is why there are so many resilience initiatives in serious organisations. Assume it is gonna happen. Limit blast radius, ensure effective recovery.
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
Databases are much more tricky, but if we're talking a significant shift, it is as good a plan as any. Clearly server trust is not working.
AI is accelerating both sides for defenders and attackers, but mobile clients are already way ahead of typical desktop. Android's desktop mode exists in the OS now but needs a lot of work and more powerful chips before it can replace desktops.
For security against remote attacks, I'd rank clients roughly: GrapheneOS, iOS/iPadOS, stock Android on Pixels, ChromeOS, macOS, Windows, desktop Linux. Prefer more secure clients, always, but now the client is all that's left to trust for content.
Native clients avoid the web E2EE problem and are easier than ever to build. With AI, you can audit the source as often as you want and reproducible builds mean you know that's what you're running.
Overall though the point is any particular hole that you have will be exploited
so what used to be a game of “patch the hole” is going to need to change entirely
Pwn2Own was demonstrating no stack as secure back then, too. People were told defense in depth, recovery methods, rapid spin up and lockdown, for the last few decades.
[dead]