←back to thread

1597 points seapunk | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
geoffeg ◴[] No.22703171[source]
> As quarantined millions gather virtually on conferencing platforms, the best of those, Zoom, is doing very well.

Why would Zoom care about their privacy issues if they're doing so well off? Seems like that's a good amount of positive reinforcement that their current approach is the right one to them. Maybe they'll lose a few thousand customers because of it, but given what I'm sure was a huge increase in the past few weeks, why would it be something they're concerned about?

replies(5): >>22703202 #>>22703237 #>>22703272 #>>22703610 #>>22703721 #
api ◴[] No.22703272[source]
The unfortunate wisdom in business is "nobody cares about privacy or security," and in my experience it's true. Outside a small number of people nobody even asks these questions.

With our own product ZeroTier we get maybe 1-2 questions a year about privacy and so far only a few enterprise customers have even asked about the security of encryption and authentication. "It's encrypted" is good enough for 99.9% of the market. Encrypted with what? A cereal box cipher? Nobody cares.

What do people care about? In my experience its ease of use, ease of use, ease of use, ease of use, and ease of use, in no particular order. An app that's a privacy and security dumpster fire but is very easy to set up and use will win hands down over a better engineered one that requires even one or two more steps to set up.

replies(2): >>22703396 #>>22703790 #
seanhunter ◴[] No.22703396[source]
My experience is diametrically opposite to that. All of our clients are large enterprises and the security and privacy features are very closely examined during procurement literally every time. We haven't had a single client conversation that is remotely like what you're describing.

Might be because our clients are banks but they really care about this stuff.

replies(3): >>22703677 #>>22704261 #>>22706058 #
thoraway1010 ◴[] No.22706058[source]
Actually - you'll be surprised at the shadow IT going on at places like this. Users will literally BEG anyone who knows how to get around these systems how to do so.

It's why your banker might use their cell phone for a zoom client when everyone else is on a computer - their work computer is locked down. Govt employees often the same way. You'll notice they are doing the phone call in or phone client vs their computer.

Lot's of companies, zoom included, get in through the user side not the big webex / cisco type sales process.

replies(1): >>22707692 #
1. api ◴[] No.22707692[source]
I worked in a place some time ago where someone was hired with the unofficial (but generally known) job description of defeating IT restrictions and security policies so people could actually get something done.

It's very very hard to lock down a network without drastically impacting productivity, especially if you have any kind of science, design, or development going on.

replies(1): >>22708106 #
2. thoraway1010 ◴[] No.22708106[source]
I worked a job where to get something scanned you had to go the neighborhood mailbox place and FAX it to the fax number this org had so it would show up electronically.

I kid you not - obviously they had a deal on faxing for like 50% off, but it was still SUPER timeconsuming and pretty expensive.

Anyways, I configured one of their state of the art copiers to allow them to securely scan to users local folders. I set permissions dropbox style (upload, list but no read / download / delete). It was like I was a god briefly. Then someone in IT found out and the party ended big time.

Realize this isn't that long ago - we are talking some orgs / IT departments are SERIOUSLY retro. I could tell many funny stories (and some sad ones) about folks working around the IT department.

Another common IT workaround was that if a device was not on approved list (basically everything except some junky low bid stuff and definitely no no macs / no ipads) and you had a need (ie marketing / media department wanted to do something with kids shooting and editing video as a feel good, and ipads were great for that and the offical machines sucked) is they would hire a consultant to help them edit, and then put a procurement for the equipment through the consulting bill. Consultant got to mark it all up, but it didn't have to go through the IT purchasing process where ipad's were banned. Was time consuming but I saw it work.

Anyways, I know EXACTLY the type of org who buys these expensive video conferencing systems that fall over when you need them!