Flame Malware and trust authorities

[anu]

Slashdot has a story about how flame was signed with a MS certificate
http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/06/04/1211206/microsoft-certificate-was-used-to-sign-flame-malware

I am wondering if we could use that incident to show that *anything* that relies on central trust authorities must be avoided like the plague. Or, to be quite blunt, whether we could use this incident to spread massive FUD against all centralized payment infrastructures. Is it time to strike back?

[1715299775]

1715299775

[1715299775]

1715299775

[1715299775]

1715299775

[1715299775]

1715299775

[adamstgBit]

no need to "strike back"

Just let the centralized payment infrastructures fail all by them selves

mean while we'll be paving the way to the future 

[anu]

no need to "strike back"

Just let the centralized payment infrastructures fail all by them selves

mean while we'll be paving the way to the future  

Well, I am not looking forward to a failure of SWIFT or SEPA or similar, particularly when it's a coordinated attack. It seems to me a successful attack on those can create much more damage than 9/11. Taking out those server rooms plus their associated BCP facilities seems almost trivial compared to 9/11. So far we have been lucky that terrorists usually went for the spectacular sound and light effect.

So trying to attack the centralized design paradigm for critical global infrastrucures before terrorists attack the centralized facilities seems a good idea.

[MaxSan]

Or, to be quite blunt, whether we could use this incident to spread massive FUD against all centralized payment infrastructures.

Epic. gave me a giggle this fine morning.

How do you propose to go about this though?

[anu]

Epic. gave me a giggle this fine morning.

How do you propose to go about this though?

About the same way you go about my post: ridicule. You got to admit it's effective.

[LightRider]

http://convergence.io/

Stop being a slave to the CA's tyranny.