rmsladeshaw.ca
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 09:34:06 -0700
We're binge-watching a TV show called "Bull." (For years I've had to be careful about watching movies and TV with a high tech or security theme, since they make so many mistakes. Apparently, having spent a couple of decades teaching American law to Americans, I now have to avoid legal TV shows and movies as well.)
In one episode (s3e4) they have a computer expert (someone who can program) giving testimony. He is to explain a "backdoor."
Now, as everyone here knows, a backdoor (aka trapdoor) is a technical means of
circumventing a technical control or safeguard, usually to do with access
control. There are some legitimate uses for backdoors, generally in
development, but they are generally considered a "bad thing" in production. The
"expert" explains that a backdoor is a means of evading a control, but it's a
(presumably technical, because he programmed it) means of evading a policy or
regulatory control.
This piece of dialogue is a really interesting mix of fact and serious misunderstanding. Yes, a backdoor is a means of evading a control. But the backdoor and the control are of different types. Generally a technical evasion cannot evade a policy or regulatory control (although it might obfuscate the issue). To someone who only partially understands the situation, it might seem reasonable, but, in fact, in reality it makes no sense at all.
(Oh, come on. I wrote a *dictionary*, and you expect me to put up with this?)
(Yes, I know. This is why you don't want to watch technically themed movies and TV shows with me. Gloria has to put up with these kinds of interruptions and explanations *a lot*.)