Unfortunately, I don't think the 'Nobody is going to die' statement holds up for software like cryptocat. If it is promoted as secure, then it could be used in areas with hostile regimes. For example, members of the Arab Spring uprising might have trusted cryptocat, but what if their governments were intercepting and decrypting those messages due to a flaw in the software?

Bottom line, explaining away problems by saying 'nobody is going to die' is a downright dangerous statement IMO.

> "Nobody is going to die."

This isn't accurate, e.g. http://cryptome.org/2012/07/chile-comments.htm .

Bad crypto is actually much more dangerous than a single rogue dentist.

Bad crypto doesn't kill, people/organizations with a fucked up agenda do.

I thought this past year taught us that no information is safe. To expect that any system is entirely secure and ever will be is pure egotism.

Then what's the point?

And one of those exceptions is people trying to use bad crypto to avoid persecution...

Normally, yes, but this is crypto. It's not medicine, but it's pretty close to a bullet-proof vest. It's important that it does its job.

That's true. Market software accordingly and everything is fine.

I am glad to see cryptocat being much more careful with their wording.

Except if the flawed software is a company's core product, the company might fail.

As we all know, corporations are people, my friend.