Schneier Endorses Zoom

[CraginS]

In an April 30 blog post, Brice Schneier seems to be endorsing Zoom as having corrected enough problems that he now trusts it enough for academic and business use. He does note that the key generation and storage processes in Zoom still need improvement.

See

Securing Internet Videoconferencing Apps: Zoom and Others

But note that in a follow up reply on that page he said, "I wouldn't run a UK Cabinet meeting over Zoom, though."

Craig

[AppDefects]

---

@CraginS wrote:

In an April 30 blog post, Brice Schneier seems to be endorsing Zoom as having corrected enough problems that he now trusts it enough for academic and business use. He does note that the key generation and storage processes in Zoom still need improvement.

See

Securing Internet Videoconferencing Apps: Zoom and Others

But note that in a follow up reply on that page he said, "I wouldn't run a UK Cabinet meeting over Zoom, though."

Craig

---

Has he lost his mind? Does he need controversy to sell books?

[CraginS]

---

@AppDefects wrote:

---

Has he lost his mind? Does he need controversy to sell books or even to get people to think he still matters in 2020?

---

Rachel,

Read the comments on the linked blog page, and you will find quite a few others have had similar reactions.

Craig

[Caute_cautim]

@AppDefects   Probably he left IBM....... 🙂

Regards

Caute_cautim

[AppDefects]

This is very interesting development in how Zoom censors: Zoom says it can’t “change the laws of governments opposed to free speech.”

[Caute_cautim]

@AppDefects   Sounds like an excuse to me.

Regards

Caute_cautim

[Caute_cautim]

An interesting take from Forbes on Zoom:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quickerbettertech/2020/06/14/zoom-just-gave-free-users-frightening-news...

Regards

Caute_cautim

[wimremes]

Zoom, from a security perspective, isn't worse than the other videoconferencing tools out there and with the E2EE plans they have published they can actually leap ahead of the competition.

We can debate on their ethics (e.g. blocking a US-based user because China asked is a big no-no. So that's some bad juju upon them). While it's not a company I will willingly do business with, am I to refuse a conference call with every client that has decided to use them? That's not realistic.

[sdurbin]

Its extremely rare to come across an argument that is objective in these scenarios. Usually when a large tech company gets on their high horse its because they're attempting to stifle competition rather than advocate for privacy rights.

The security track record of most big tech companies is a "mixed bag" at best for the most part.

You add politics, or money, in to anything and things inevitably get messy.

I think Bruce's advice is spot on. Zoom is as fit for purpose as any other conferencing tool for most use cases.

There are some conversations that one would hope would remain behind the proverbial closed door though.

[Caute_cautim]

@sdurbin   I agree, but tell that to Prime Ministers of UK, New Zealand using Zoom for their conferences.   And others using Facebook Live etc.

All in context and the nature of the data/information being discussed and who really would gain advantage from accessing it whether it is an insider threat or and external one.

A matter of risk management and judgement - often people simply ignore it or null it from their thought processes for convenience purposes.

Regards

Caute_cautim