The Security Tax And The Toll It Takes

from the security-ain't-cheap dept

Yesterday, we wrote about an MIT Tech Review piece talking about how the internet was broken, and needed an architectural overhaul for better security.  That was the first in a three part series.  The second part came out tonight, and goes into more detail about the supposedly weakening structural integrity of today's internet.  The problem is presented as something of a house of cards.  Over the past few decades, as the internet has grown and changed and new security problems have been exposed, we've just patched them over.  But not everyone patches the same way, and not all the patches work together nicely.  So the system has grown increasingly complex in ways that should only get worse.  The other interesting idea put forth in the article is that security is a "tax" on all computing.  The tax is made up of the price of software, where extra time and money needs to go into developing it security, to the time and distractions of having to repair software, even to the processing power wasted on the all those security apps you have to run these days.  The fear is that, based on the house of cards approach, this tax keeps getting bigger and bigger.  So far, it's been manageable, but does it always stay that way?  Definitely some interesting things to think about -- but the two articles still haven't touched on the unintended consequences of trying to completely re-architect the internet in a more secure manner, so hopefully part III will at least acknowledge this issue.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Don Gray, 20 Dec 2005 @ 5:42am

    Monolithic is better?

    Hasn't Microsoft and the market penetration it enjoys in the OS market shown that a monolithic approach is NOT better for security?
    What some would consider a "house of cards" others would consider a defensive strategy of not being a cookie cutter.
    Could the securing of the Internet be more efficient? Yes. Would that make it more secure? Not necessarily.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.