zlacker

[return to "The Dangers of Microsoft Pluton"]
1. Gh0stR+eg[view] [source] 2022-07-26 06:26:56
>>gjsman+(OP)
I'm completely missing how his example of a Word document that can only be opened by approved users on approved hardware within the corporation is supposed to be a bad thing.

Honestly, that sounds pretty fantastic. I've been using 3rd party tools/extensions to do this sort of thing in corporate and government environments for years, but having the attestation go all the way down to the hardware level is a big value-add, especially with so much ransomware/spyware/extortion/espionage going on these days.

Can someone please explain to me how the author might see this level of security as a bad thing?

◧◩
2. POPOSY+qn[view] [source] 2022-07-26 07:43:24
>>Gh0stR+eg
What tools are you using today to realize this scenario? Thanks!
◧◩◪
3. Gh0stR+9G1[view] [source] 2022-07-26 16:32:06
>>POPOSY+qn
The plugin my current employer uses is so well integrated that I don't even know its name. (I suspect it may be developed internally)

At a past job, we used Entrust [0] and I'm aware of Virtru [1] as well.

Edit: I forgot about Sharepoint, which also sort-of fills the ACL document-sharing niche. (though I'm less certain about whether it uses encryption to enforce its access policies)

[0] https://www.entrust.com/ [1] https://www.virtru.com/

[go to top]