I lived in a house that had such secure windows. I even witnessed someone trying and failing to smash a window with a brick.
it seems like a bad analogy on the GP's part
This is absurd.
Even the passive basics like relying on your free email provider's filtering and running Windows Defender is going to stop a huge number of attacks.
If you're expecting perfect security, you'll be disappointed -- but we can't declare complete bankruptcy.
For what it's worth, I'm not disagreeing with your points about needing drastic, systemic improvements in how we handle security.
«A ragtag bunch of amateur hackers, many of them teenagers with little technical training, have been so adept at breaching large targets, including Microsoft, Okta, Nvidia, and Globant, that the federal government is studying their methods to get a better grounding in cybersecurity.»
My opinion is that we fail completely to build secure systems in a forward thinking way and the fact that we manage to stop threat actors that exploit holes that are already known to us is insignificant.
[0]: https://arstechnica.com/security/2023/08/homeland-security-d...
Modern phones and other appliances have (or are) computers to which it is nigh impossible to operate as root. You might say you have to pwn them even if you supposedly own them ;)
That reminds me of:
> With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine.
Possibly another important would be NHTSA gathers and publishes numbers on accidents. Having some regularly published numbers would certainly shine more light and is probably lowest hurdle to cross from a political standpoint.
In a free society, why would we ask government (lowercase g) for a window certification sticker? Should government also provide condom anti-breakage stickers? If we want this, maybe UL can set the standard and ask for volunteer testers to affirm the condom or window anti-breakage quality.
Or maybe we can put the Bell System back together and let them regulate what devices may connect to the network. That led to expensive monthly handset charges.
The condom comment is absolutely ridiculous because there are loads of regulations regarding condoms from the FDA. Unsurprisingly you aren't allowed to sell condoms that are likely to break.
Reasons I think we might want some government certification that has real teeth include: the freedom to protect and control our own digital data. A statistically high rate of surveillance and cyber crime with no tools to prevent it impedes the very freedom you’re defending. Absolute freedom for all cannot exist. You can’t be free to keep your money & privacy while I’m free to take it. Real certifications with enforcement teeth wouldn’t solve all problems, but it might make an actual dent. It would be nice to have national security and privacy standards, make purchasing decisions easier (actually sane), prevent some of the crime before it happens, and reduce the crime and surveillance that we know exists. That’s just from a consumer point of view. I’m sure there are many many companies and organizations who would love to be able to have some level of trust in their equipment purchasing without expensive vetting (or far more realistically for most orgs, little to no vetting at all, just hope).
Didn’t the government break the Bell system apart in the first place? When did they get back together and upcharge handsets? I don’t know what you’re referring to. Are you saying that what was needed after the Bell breakup is stronger regulatory oversight with bigger teeth?
What would be meaningful is an assertion that some basic set of secure practices have been or are followed. For example, that there are no default passwords on a device, that security updates will be provided on some defined schedule, that network protocols meet some reasonable standard of security, etc.